(03-05-2015 11:13 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Freeaking BENGHAZI!!!

It's always something else that they find that is somewhat related to the witch hunt. It's disgusting.

Freaking CRUSADES!

(03-05-2015 12:51 PM)shiftyeagle Wrote:  

(03-05-2015 11:13 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Freeaking BENGHAZI!!!

It's always something else that they find that is somewhat related to the witch hunt. It's disgusting.

Freaking CRUSADES!

Mach has a lot of compassion for the families of the people that were murdered at Benghazi. What a compassionate lib.

[quote='Machiavelli' pid='11837890' dateline='1425572512']
I see the witch hunt (I hate using that word because of the connotations) for exactly what it is. To destroy her candidacy.

Let me guess, it's just another right wing conspiracy theory?

SHE was the one that broke the law. It's as simple as that. Now, will anything come of it, I doubt it since she's a Clinton. However, that doesn't excuse the fact that she knowingly decided to not follow the law and put the national security of our country at risk.

(03-05-2015 12:49 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  She lost your vote Smaug? She might be made of Teflon.

Why do you want this woman to be president so badly, Mach?

Don't tell me about any other candidate, and how she might compare to them.

Hillary Clinton in a vacuum. Why do you want her to be president?

Senator Hillary Clinton complaining about secret Bush email accounts.....Priceless

(03-05-2015 02:26 PM)EagleRockCafe Wrote:  Senator Hillary Clinton complaining about secret Bush email accounts.....Priceless

I'm more a fan of her state department firing the Ambassador for this very thing.

"The most intelligent, qualified woman IN THE WORLD"!!!

Can't make this schit up.

Here's the pattern.

The media gives the Democrats a little crap for a week or two when an election is WAY off. In a couple months when she announces her run they will say it's old news. "Sheesh, we've been over all that *eye roll*. I mean, I answered all the questions" (from reporters who then high-five her out the door)

I still think she's our next President because she will scare the populace less than what the GOP will give us. You know the GOP guy will be ran through the wringer and it won't be hard to paint him that way when he comes out of the primary. We all know the score. A GOP prez scares women. Tears up the furniture and berates people. A couple of articles about vaginal probes before the election. Bingo Bango Bongo another Clinton for 8 years.


Tell me I'm wrong Smaug.

The answer to your question always will be "she will be better than the alternative."

(03-05-2015 02:40 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Here's the pattern.

The media gives the Democrats a little crap for a week or two when an election is WAY off. In a couple months when she announces her run they will say it's old news. "Sheesh, we've been over all that *eye roll*. I mean, I answered all the questions" (from reporters who then high-five her out the door)

I still think she's our next President because she will scare the populace less than what the GOP will give us. You know the GOP guy will be ran through the wringer and it won't be hard to paint him that way when he comes out of the primary. We all know the score. A GOP prez scares women. Tears up the furniture and berates people. A couple of articles about vaginal probes before the election. Bingo Bango Bongo another Clinton for 8 years.


Tell me I'm wrong Smaug.

The answer to your question always will be "she will be better than the alternative."

That was an answer the Clintons would be proud of. Nice work.

I'll try again. Ignoring every other candidate, what makes you believe she is uniquely appropriate for the presidency?

I can't help but notice I've asked you this more than once and the best you could do was one Richard B. Cheney calling her the most competent member of the Obama administration.

Republicans should leave her alone and let her run.

Honestly, if she ends up dropping out or whatever....we get Elizabeth Warren, who is a completely insane wingnut despite being a Native American.

The answer is and always will be. She's better than the alternative.

(03-05-2015 03:01 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  The answer is and always will be. She's better than the alternative.

So someone who has broken the law and not accomplished anything noteworthy in the public sector is better than any other candidate?

Wow you put a lot of thought into your presidential candidates.

She won't get us into another pottery barn war.

She won't push for tax cuts and then bloat the budget.

She won't hand over the EPA to the oil lobby.

She will appoint Supreme Court Justices I will approve of.

(03-05-2015 03:09 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  She will appoint Supreme Court Justices I will approve of.

Well, as long as you do.

(03-05-2015 03:09 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  She won't get us into another pottery barn war.

She won't push for tax cuts and then bloat the budget.

She won't hand over the EPA to the oil lobby.

She will appoint Supreme Court Justices I will approve of.

Be honest. It really doesn't matter who the other side runs...
You are a died in the wool liberal union member and would vote for crooked Richard Daly, Marion Berry, etc. before you would ever pull the lever for a Republican.

(03-05-2015 03:09 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  She won't get us into another pottery barn war.

She won't push for tax cuts and then bloat the budget.

She won't hand over the EPA to the oil lobby.

She will appoint Supreme Court Justices I will approve of.

On the pottery barn wars, I wonder.

No, she'll bloat the government and raise your taxes.

You might not like who she DID hand government agencies to, but then you might.

Abortion's going to stay legal either way.

I voted for George Voinovich and I would gladly vote for him against Hillary Clinton. That is a good republican. He is a nice man.

(03-05-2015 11:36 AM)Machiavelli Wrote:  Jon Stewart came to her defense.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/05...07012.html

that's not a defense, just a crappy headline. What he is saying is right, those that think she broke the law were not going to vote for her anyways. Those that were going to vote for her see this as a small issue.

(03-05-2015 03:40 PM)Machiavelli Wrote:  I voted for George Voinovich and I would gladly vote for him against Hillary Clinton. That is a good republican. He is a nice man.

I'm glad to hear that you will at least consider the other side.
Try keeping an open mind...
there really are good honest people on both sides but none of them carry the last name of Clinton.

Lawrence O’Donnell: Hillary’s Email System was ‘Designed to Defy the Law’



Ok, when a leftie like O'Odonnell comes down this hard on Pantsuits, I am beginning to buy into this being an orchestrated attack on Clinton organized by the left, primarily Obamabots.

Quote:MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell has been surprisingly all over the Hillary Clinton emails story since it broke – landing himself in an RNC ad, no less — and on Thursday said the former Secretary of State’s entire system was “designed to defy the law.” That law is, of course, the Freedom of Information Act.

In the segment, first flagged by America Rising, Alex Wagner pointed out that former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush also chose which of his emails to release. O’Donnell said, though, he has been surprised at the reactions from liberals who have pointed to George W. Bush as the “standard” on transparency — “something they [liberals] normally find to be evil on everything.”

“Bush’s emails were legally available to everyone,” O’Donnell said. “Hillary Clinton’s system was designed to defy Freedom of Information Act requests, which is designed to defy the law.”

He went on to say that the Freedom of Information Act was a “decades-long liberal crusade” since the Nixon Administration. So, O’Donnell said, the law that Clinton is defying is a “liberal” one. Wagner asked him if this hurts Clinton with the liberal base, and O’Donnell said it doesn’t because voters simply follow an absolute partisan “devotion” to their candidates.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/lawrence-odon...y-the-law/

The left leaning media have decided that Hillary isn't socialist/communist enough for them.