(04-10-2014 12:48 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:38 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:33 PM)Crebman Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 07:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What can you say positive about Hillary except that she would probably win the election?
What has she ever accomplished that would make you believe she would be a successful president?
To me it looks like the left is going all ga-ga over Hillary because they think she would almost certainly win an election, with no regard whatsoever to whether she is actually capable and qualified to do the job. That's pretty scary.

Are you guys ever going to tire of this meme?

Several weeks back I rattled off the list of the presidential contenders for the past couple decades. Her qualifications and accomplishments are basically identical to nearly every other candidate and winner.

There's no test to prove the successfulness of a president. None.

It's a pointless exercise to keep asking this question.

And you guys keep overplaying the gaga-ness too. I would prefer another choice personally. But if it's her against any of the current crop of GOP clowns, she's got my vote. I can't regress our country by having it elect one of those yahoos.

If they found a dead cat on the side of the road and stamped a "D" on it - that would det your vote every time over any "R" candidated - just how you roll.

dumb***...quite your chirping. You have no clue about me. I'm not a Democrat and I have no love for the Democrat party. They're mostly spineless imbeciles.

But yes, they will get my vote over the even worse candidates that the R's keep trotting out.

And the last time I registered, I actually registered as a Republican...lol

I've voted for numerous R's in local and state elections in the past and will likely vote for Gov. Snyder in the next Michigan election.

And I'm not totally opposed to voting for Chris Christie either...if he cleans up his bullying act a little.

Just because you have this picture of me that you feel is correct, doesn't give you the basis to keep trotting out the same old ridiculous line that idiots like SOAF keep playing.

You're just plain wrong.

......then quit carrying water for every Democrat that screws up. Maybe then I won't assume you're so biased.

I don't. Did I carry any water for Weiner? Rangel? Wu? Grayson (although we don't know yet if he did anything)? Jackson, Jr.? Lerner (assuming she's a D)? Hillary on Benghazi? And I'm sure there are others.

Again, your basing your theory on my taking to task those who make assumptions or just plain make **** up. In those cases, I'm not excusing any behavior that is actually wrong, I'm defending facts and reality.

It's not my fault that there is a never ending leaky faucet of bull**** on here daily, thread after thread.

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Lerner (assuming she's a D)?

Ooooh goodness, Tom, I chortled when I read that.

Dick Cheney none the less raved about her as one of the more competent people he worked with on the other side of the aisle.

Btw I was joking about the land development. whitewater

Cattle futures- wasn't that the basis of a conspiracy that got someone killed?? I'm surprised no one picked up on that.


I don't think a governorship trumps other public service but it's debatable. Hillary is accomplished no matter how you shake it.

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

How about actually DOING something? Her supposed qualifications are what she has BEEN. What has she actually DONE while in the process of being all these things?

She's actually a fantastic candidate. Candidate is 100% different than a president though.

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

Running something successfully would qualify.

(04-10-2014 12:15 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 07:26 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-09-2014 07:14 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Mmmmm. Mmmmmm
That Hillary....... Sure looking goooood!!!

What can you say positive about Hillary except that she would probably win the election?
What has she ever accomplished that would make you believe she would be a successful president?
To me it looks like the left is going all ga-ga over Hillary because they think she would almost certainly win an election, with no regard whatsoever to whether she is actually capable and qualified to do the job. That's pretty scary.

Are you guys ever going to tire of this meme?

Several weeks back I rattled off the list of the presidential contenders for the past couple decades. Her qualifications and accomplishments are basically identical to nearly every other candidate and winner.

Uhm.. no, you did like everyone else. You just went off naming job titles. You were called out to name SIGNIFICANT items they did at those jobs, and you ignored the question).

Hell, look at the video from MSNBC. Bill Kristol and Joe Scarborough named _THREE_ female senators who had more qualifications than Clinton (They named McCaskill, Snowe, and what's her name from Washington)..

I will say this.. we were asking the same thing about Obama. (His "accomplishments' were a Senator that voted "Present" more than any other in history and the fact that he was a "community organizer".)

And it didnt' stop low-information voters from voting for him anyway .. twice.

That moment when millions or racists suddenly become sexists. It's almost here.

(04-11-2014 05:19 AM)firmbizzle Wrote:  That moment when millions or racists suddenly become sexists. It's almost here.

The moment when sweeping generalizations and hyperbole show ones character....we are there.

(04-10-2014 07:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

How about actually DOING something? Her supposed qualifications are what she has BEEN. What has she actually DONE while in the process of being all these things?

It really cracks me up when you act stupid. I'm sure while working at a law firm, being a senator and leading the state department among other things, that she did nothing but sit at a desk all day and play minesweeper.

Yeah...this is clearly the wiki page of someone who has done nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Moron.

Tom bringin' the wiki.

I guess we've all been told.

Isn't calling Hillary Clinton "Pant Suits" a bit dehumanizing?

(04-14-2014 10:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 07:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

How about actually DOING something? Her supposed qualifications are what she has BEEN. What has she actually DONE while in the process of being all these things?

It really cracks me up when you act stupid. I'm sure while working at a law firm, being a senator and leading the state department among other things, that she did nothing but sit at a desk all day and play minesweeper.

Yeah...this is clearly the wiki page of someone who has done nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Moron.

It's funny how tommy's posts always remind me of cartoons

Failed at a health-care initiative. Check.
Failed Presidential bid. Check.
Scandals. Check.
Appointed to Sec. State. Check.
Low profile Senator. Check.
Votes for/against stuff. Check.
Accomplishments.
Accomplishments.
Accomplishments.

Not finding them at wiki Tom.

She did accomplish landing a man. Not that outstanding, lots of lesbians have.

(04-14-2014 10:38 AM)Paul M Wrote:  Failed at a health-care initiative. Check.
Failed Presidential bid. Check.
Scandals. Check.
Appointed to Sec. State. Check.
Low profile Senator. Check.
Votes for/against stuff. Check.
Accomplishments.
Accomplishments.
Accomplishments.

Not finding them at wiki Tom.

She did accomplish landing a man. Not that outstanding, lots of lesbians have.

Dude, the assertion wasn't that she has accomplished something, it was that she hasn't done anything. Even trying and failing is still doing something.

And Owl likes to tout that winning a governorship is doing something...and this differs naught from winning a senatorial election.

(04-14-2014 10:34 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 07:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 12:43 PM)Crebman Wrote:  ...an accomplishment that remotely points to being a good president.

Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

How about actually DOING something? Her supposed qualifications are what she has BEEN. What has she actually DONE while in the process of being all these things?

It really cracks me up when you act stupid. I'm sure while working at a law firm, being a senator and leading the state department among other things, that she did nothing but sit at a desk all day and play minesweeper.

Yeah...this is clearly the wiki page of someone who has done nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Moron.

It's funny how tommy's posts always remind me of cartoons

Well...when you have the analytical mind of a child, what do you expect?

Geez, I gave the lesbian credit.

(04-14-2014 10:47 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:34 AM)DrTorch Wrote:  

(04-14-2014 10:24 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 07:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(04-10-2014 02:46 PM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Could you please elaborate on what you believe such an accomplishment would be?

How about actually DOING something? Her supposed qualifications are what she has BEEN. What has she actually DONE while in the process of being all these things?

It really cracks me up when you act stupid. I'm sure while working at a law firm, being a senator and leading the state department among other things, that she did nothing but sit at a desk all day and play minesweeper.

Yeah...this is clearly the wiki page of someone who has done nothing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Rodham_Clinton

Moron.

It's funny how tommy's posts always remind me of cartoons

Well...when you have the analytical mind of a child, what do you expect?

I'm shocked that you agree with me. Your childish analyses brings cartoons to mind. But this was a high point for you, usually your posts are more akin to Superfriends or Patrick from Sponge Bob.

I would have thought all the foreign DNA on her husband's dork would have been far, far more dehumanizing.