More about Clinton...confirming what we know

[Guest]

Linda Tripp reveals why 'Hillary Clinton must never be President' | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3176621/Lies-cover-ups-corruption-Linda-Tripp-West-Wing-assistant-outed-Monica-Lewinsky-s-sexual-liaison-Bill-Clinton-talks-time-Hillary-tells-never-President.html)

And even more:

Joe Biden (http://www.nationaljournal.com/against-the-grain/joe-biden-s-political-moment-20150728)

[Guest]

Linda Tripp reveals why 'Hillary Clinton must never be President' | Daily Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3176621/Lies-cover-ups-corruption-Linda-Tripp-West-Wing-assistant-outed-Monica-Lewinsky-s-sexual-liaison-Bill-Clinton-talks-time-Hillary-tells-never-President.html)

And even more:

Joe Biden (http://www.nationaljournal.com/against-the-grain/joe-biden-s-political-moment-20150728)

Now there's a good combination - Linda Tripp and Daily Mail Online. No thanks.

[Guest]

Now there's a good combination - Linda Tripp and Daily Mail Online. No thanks.

OK we got the usual diss the messenger....what do you have to offer about what was said (for a change)?

[Guest]

Now there's a good combination - Linda Tripp and Daily Mail Online. No thanks.

Dear Guest: I am not the OP. However, did you read the articles? How would you defend Clinton against her critics? What is it that Linda Tripp said that wasn't true? Isn't it true that Clinton is in violation of federal laws because she used a personal server and because she destroy e-mails that belonged to the State Department? didn't she break federal rules by not turning in these mails until she was forced to? Do you think it OK for any federal employee to ignore federal rules that were enacted to protect information that could harm citizens?

You dismiss Linda Tripp and the Daily Mail Online out of hand but contrary to evidence and common sense believe Clinton?????????????????


Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

You Dumpublicans are so scared that Sec. Clinton will get the Democratic nomination and win the presidency that you are relying on hate articles by Linda Tripp that are in a fish wrapper?

Even the Regressives that usually post here are almost intelligence enough to see that is akin to having Al Sharpton as guest speaker at your Tea Party meeting discussing gun control.

[Guest]

You Dumpublicans are so scared that Sec. Clinton will get the Democratic nomination and win the presidency that you are relying on hate articles by Linda Tripp that are in a fish wrapper?

Even the Regressives that usually post here are almost intelligence enough to see that is akin to having Al Sharpton as guest speaker at your Tea Party meeting discussing gun control.

The triple X kool aide was obviously not enough...now you are spiking it with blindness.

[Guest]

Dear Guest: I am not the OP. However, did you read the articles? How would you defend Clinton against her critics? What is it that Linda Tripp said that wasn't true? Isn't it true that Clinton is in violation of federal laws because she used a personal server and because she destroy e-mails that belonged to the State Department? didn't she break federal rules by not turning in these mails until she was forced to? Do you think it OK for any federal employee to ignore federal rules that were enacted to protect information that could harm citizens?

You dismiss Linda Tripp and the Daily Mail Online out of hand but contrary to evidence and common sense believe Clinton?????????????????


Personal Best Regards:

She is a criminal, no doubt about it. But, you have those easily led folks that find being a criminal a positive thing. You can't convince them. This election will be decided by the Independent voters, and they are not so easily led. Billary won't have the large black turnout that Obama had.

[Guest]

The triple X kool aide was obviously not enough...now you are spiking it with blindness.

:agree:

[Guest]

You Dumpublicans are so scared that Sec. Clinton will get the Democratic nomination and win the presidency that you are relying on hate articles by Linda Tripp that are in a fish wrapper?

Even the Regressives that usually post here are almost intelligence enough to see that is akin to having Al Sharpton as guest speaker at your Tea Party meeting discussing gun control.

I don't need and probably won't read the article. I didn't vote for her pervert husband, and I don't intend to vote for her. She is just about as much a socialist as Obama and I didn't vote for him either. Whether she gets elected or not, at least my conscience is clear that I didn't contribute to America's future demise. Her ideology doesn't mesh with mine, and that is all I need to know. She is a criminal. She unlawfully and knowingly mishandled classified information. Just one of her later ethical violations. But, the State Department is where a lot of political appointees that contributed to each president, gets their "reward." Call names as you wish. Any adult recognizes the juvenile that acts up at the dinner table. You may be excused. :wave:

[Guest]

Dear Guest: I am not the OP. However, did you read the articles? How would you defend Clinton against her critics? What is it that Linda Tripp said that wasn't true? Isn't it true that Clinton is in violation of federal laws because she used a personal server and because she destroy e-mails that belonged to the State Department? didn't she break federal rules by not turning in these mails until she was forced to? Do you think it OK for any federal employee to ignore federal rules that were enacted to protect information that could harm citizens?

You dismiss Linda Tripp and the Daily Mail Online out of hand but contrary to evidence and common sense believe Clinton?????????????????


Personal Best Regards:

They can't defend her. That's why they call names and blame Bush. Makes you wonder about the mental capacity of those that knowing support those that they can't defend. Like a very wiser person once said, those folks are just a few fries short of a Happy Meal! :mmmm:

[Guest]

Dear Guests,
Suppose, just suppose, that by some fluke that Sec. Clinton DOES win the Presidency against ______. Are all of you going to spend the next 8 years grousing over every piece of soundbite you can find?

Get out to your candidate of choice at this time and start working for him/her. Contribute money in large amounts to their campaigns. Let the candidate lead a good life with your money while they are still a candidate. Stir up the community with signs of support on your car and cart. Of course, be prepared for them to be taken off by opposing candidate supporters.

Stop just talking about how terrible the Democrats are but actually do something positive so when the Republican nominee is named, you might have had something to do with it. At that point, donate more money and time to the Republican PACs and start working volunteer time for that candidate. Get fired up!

Then, in November, get together with your fellow campaign workers, watch the returns on television, and hopefully see Karl Rove melt down like he did in 2012 when Ohio was called for Obama. That was PRICELESS.

Or you can just sit back, do nothing except gripe on TOV. The result will be the same, no matter what you do.

HILLARY CLINTON WINS THE PRESIDENCY IN 2016.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

You Dumpublicans are so scared that Sec. Clinton will get the Democratic nomination and win the presidency that you are relying on hate articles by Linda Tripp that are in a fish wrapper?

Even the Regressives that usually post here are almost intelligence enough to see that is akin to having Al Sharpton as guest speaker at your Tea Party meeting discussing gun control.


I don't want to get involved except I suggest you be nice person and plan to visit Hillary in prison after she gets convicted for mishandling 100s of classified emails because she is apparently an idiot as well as dishonest.

[Guest]

I am sure when she isn't convicted of anything everyone here will say they were wrong. Of course, that will be the case. Anyone that reads the posts on any one of threads here can see how opened minded the Republicans here are.

People never change their party affiliation. Right Donald Trump! When they do, they always have good things to say about their former friends. Donald Trump is heaping praise on Hillary right now. Anyone that can't see that just isn't looking.

Hillary was the real force in Bill's presidency. She ran things despite all evidence to the contrary. I think this woman has confused Nancy and Ron with Hillary and Bill. The cameras can make someone look good or bad. Ten years or so after Reagan left office, there was a news report to that effect.

A reporter asked Reagan a question, and he was on camera. Reagan head was bobbing up and down. He had no clue how to answer the reporter. Nancy was behind him, and also on camera. Nancy said, "That problem has come to our attention." Reagan repeated that word for word to the reporter. "That problem has come to our attention." Nancy, "we should have a solution to that problem soon." Ron "we should have a solution to that problem soon." Nancy, "when we do, we will contact you." Ron, "when we do, we will contact you."

If Tripp came forward in the late 90's, she might be believable. Now, only closed minded Republicans would believe her nonsense. If you go back in time, you can make any public person look good or bad.

I have said this before, Hillary has been running for president, since at least the nineties. How can any women endure the public humiliation she did, and still stay with her husband? That doesn't mean she was running the show in the 90's. Hardly!

My God could it be, a republican doesn't like Karl Rove! There is hope. By the way, I am not voting for Hillary. It will Sanders, or Kasich in the primary. It will depend on the one needs my vote more.

[Guest]

There is no federal law that stopped her from using a personal server.

Did she destroy emails that belonged to the state department? She might have, but how are you going to prove it?

Turn the mails to the fifth Benghazi investigation. You know the current one that the Chairman Trey Gowdy called a prosecution. That one. The one that is going to last until November, 2016. Given all the leaks out of these hearing, can you blame any candidate for not handing private emails over to the opposing party in the current world of politics.

Should she have handed the server to an independent party? No! She should sat there with an independent party, and gone over the emails one by one. However, the server should have never left her sight, or the independent party's sight.

Trust is a two way street. Only a fool would trust the Republicans with anything personal or not.

[Guest]

Dear Guests,
Suppose, just suppose, that by some fluke that Sec. Clinton DOES win the Presidency against ______. Are all of you going to spend the next 8 years grousing over every piece of soundbite you can find?

Get out to your candidate of choice at this time and start working for him/her. Contribute money in large amounts to their campaigns. Let the candidate lead a good life with your money while they are still a candidate. Stir up the community with signs of support on your car and cart. Of course, be prepared for them to be taken off by opposing candidate supporters.

Stop just talking about how terrible the Democrats are but actually do something positive so when the Republican nominee is named, you might have had something to do with it. At that point, donate more money and time to the Republican PACs and start working volunteer time for that candidate. Get fired up!

Then, in November, get together with your fellow campaign workers, watch the returns on television, and hopefully see Karl Rove melt down like he did in 2012 when Ohio was called for Obama. That was PRICELESS.

Or you can just sit back, do nothing except gripe on TOV. The result will be the same, no matter what you do.

HILLARY CLINTON WINS THE PRESIDENCY IN 2016.

Personal Best Regards:

Dear Poster: There you go again posing as me. I suppose I should be flattered but your message no matter how you try and hide it comes out with an obvious bile against conservatives. I talk about issues not people. So if you are going to imitate me at least do a good version of it.

And by the way you may want to consider bona fides, character,charm, intelligence, etc as criteria then direct it toward the various candidates in the field to see who best meets that criteria.

Personal Best Regards:

[Guest]

Dear Guests,
Suppose, just suppose, that by some fluke that Sec. Clinton DOES win the Presidency against ______. Are all of you going to spend the next 8 years grousing over every piece of soundbite you can find?

Get out to your candidate of choice at this time and start working for him/her. Contribute money in large amounts to their campaigns. Let the candidate lead a good life with your money while they are still a candidate. Stir up the community with signs of support on your car and cart. Of course, be prepared for them to be taken off by opposing candidate supporters.

Stop just talking about how terrible the Democrats are but actually do something positive so when the Republican nominee is named, you might have had something to do with it. At that point, donate more money and time to the Republican PACs and start working volunteer time for that candidate. Get fired up!

Then, in November, get together with your fellow campaign workers, watch the returns on television, and hopefully see Karl Rove melt down like he did in 2012 when Ohio was called for Obama. That was PRICELESS.

Or you can just sit back, do nothing except gripe on TOV. The result will be the same, no matter what you do.

HILLARY CLINTON WINS THE PRESIDENCY IN 2016.

Personal Best Regards:

The Democrat party is defunct. They went their way with the passing of our parents. It has morphed into the Euro-American Socialist party. Be smug if you wish, but it is tomorrow's generation that will have to live with the consequences of today's supposed progressives. :sad:

[Guest]

There is no federal law that stopped her from using a personal server.

Did she destroy emails that belonged to the state department? She might have, but how are you going to prove it?

Turn the mails to the fifth Benghazi investigation. You know the current one that the Chairman Trey Gowdy called a prosecution. That one. The one that is going to last until November, 2016. Given all the leaks out of these hearing, can you blame any candidate for not handing private emails over to the opposing party in the current world of politics.

Should she have handed the server to an independent party? No! She should sat there with an independent party, and gone over the emails one by one. However, the server should have never left her sight, or the independent party's sight.

Trust is a two way street. Only a fool would trust the Republicans with anything personal or not.

You are wrong. There IS federal law against what she did. I know because I worked for the Dept of State in IT. Make your ridiculously ignorant comments all you wish, but saying it doesn't make it so. Defend the criminal desperately. She has embarrassed your party and you have no one else to run, other than the admitted Socialist, Sanders. And he would NEVER get the Independent vote.

She has NO private emails once she admits that she was using the server for gov work. All her work becomes gov property, including anything private she puts on it. Sorry, but once again you have been proven wrong.

Should her email be turned over to a private party? NO. The IG should have first been involved and then if they deemed it possible of criminal mischief, they should have called in the FBI. Admittedly, the present FBI is controlled by the top criminal in the White House and it would immediately be buried. He doesn't want anyone to suspect his obvious incompetence. :spoken:

[Guest]

There is no federal law that stopped her from using a personal server.

Did she destroy emails that belonged to the state department? She might have, but how are you going to prove it?

Turn the mails to the fifth Benghazi investigation. You know the current one that the Chairman Trey Gowdy called a prosecution. That one. The one that is going to last until November, 2016. Given all the leaks out of these hearing, can you blame any candidate for not handing private emails over to the opposing party in the current world of politics.

Should she have handed the server to an independent party? No! She should sat there with an independent party, and gone over the emails one by one. However, the server should have never left her sight, or the independent party's sight.

Trust is a two way street. Only a fool would trust the Republicans with anything personal or not.

Wrong as usual. The Federal Records Act pertains. In addition, common sense applies ... except when criminal intent or just plain idiocy is involved. She's not an idiot so draw your own conclusions

[Guest]

I am sure when she isn't convicted of anything everyone here will say they were wrong. Of course, that will be the case. Anyone that reads the posts on any one of threads here can see how opened minded the Republicans here are.

People never change their party affiliation. Right Donald Trump! When they do, they always have good things to say about their former friends. Donald Trump is heaping praise on Hillary right now. Anyone that can't see that just isn't looking.

Hillary was the real force in Bill's presidency. She ran things despite all evidence to the contrary. I think this woman has confused Nancy and Ron with Hillary and Bill. The cameras can make someone look good or bad. Ten years or so after Reagan left office, there was a news report to that effect.

A reporter asked Reagan a question, and he was on camera. Reagan head was bobbing up and down. He had no clue how to answer the reporter. Nancy was behind him, and also on camera. Nancy said, "That problem has come to our attention." Reagan repeated that word for word to the reporter. "That problem has come to our attention." Nancy, "we should have a solution to that problem soon." Ron "we should have a solution to that problem soon." Nancy, "when we do, we will contact you." Ron, "when we do, we will contact you."

If Tripp came forward in the late 90's, she might be believable. Now, only closed minded Republicans would believe her nonsense. If you go back in time, you can make any public person look good or bad.

I have said this before, Hillary has been running for president, since at least the nineties. How can any women endure the public humiliation she did, and still stay with her husband? That doesn't mean she was running the show in the 90's. Hardly!

My God could it be, a republican doesn't like Karl Rove! There is hope. By the way, I am not voting for Hillary. It will Sanders, or Kasich in the primary. It will depend on the one needs my vote more.

Obviously confused when this was written. Perhaps someone should instruct this person on the primary process. And do you have any idea the difference between a socialist and a conservative? I suppose you are just joking around, because no one is legitimately that confused.

[Guest]

Wrong as usual. The Federal Records Act pertains. In addition, common sense applies ... except when criminal intent or just plain idiocy is involved. She's not an idiot so draw your own conclusions

:agree:

[Guest]

Hillary needs not adhere to statutory law that the rest us must abide by. She is/was one of the Obama clan, so she receives special passes based on race, gender and sexual preference....which ever one or more pertains. They carry a handful of wild cards that they can use, declaring a free pass based on "bigotry" of anyone questioning their actions. Hillary does not care about becoming a leader of the greatest nation on earth. She wants to be the FIRST(1st) FEMALE in the position.

[Guest]

You worked in federal government in IT. I guess the IT department you worked in was illogical thought, or maybe insane turds.

There was no LAW forbidding her from using her personal computer from government business. Rule is not a law. That rule was made law recently, but not made retroactive. All of her emails sent to government email addresses were kept on the person receiving computer. If the emails she destroyed were classified information sent to non-government people, she broke the law, and will face criminal charges.

All personal emails become government property once she used the server for government business. This has to be the most ludicrous statement ever posted here, and there isn't a close second. OK, Mr. IT answer this. "Why did Trey Gowdy ask Hillary to send her server to an independent third party? If he had very right to view her private emails, why not send the server directly to him? I know, Trey Gowdy, the prosecutor, doesn't know the law. Trey Gowdy is a Obama plant in the Republican party and he loves her so much, and would do nothing to embarrass her.

I know the primary process is. I am an Independent. I can change my party affiliation, when entering the polling booth, and change it back, when I leave. So, can you. When you enter the polling booth change from Republican to Democrat. Vote for the Democrat that has the best chance to beat Hillary, but not the Republican nominee. Then, change back. If the nominees are Hillary, and any other Republican other than Kasich, I will place a write in vote for Donald Duck.

[Guest]

Since you are ignorant of the law, it is useless to argue with you. I find it humorous that every time a liberal is losing a debate, they lose their cool and resort to derogatory comments and name calling. So be it.
Hilary broke the law. There is no denying that. It's just a matter of how it will be handled. Most likely nothing will be done about it. Today's socialist party will not throw one of their own to the dogs unless they displease the emperor.
Florida and eighteen other states have Closed Primary Elections where only members of a political party may vote in their Party's primary. Either you are not old enough to vote yet and don't understand the procedure, or you are a resident voter from another state and trolling the Villages forum. Personally, I don't care. Perhaps you will learn something on here. If Florida has changed their Independent voting procedure, then I am sure that someone will correct me. The only time an Independent can vote is in the general election. And then anyone can vote for the candidate of their choice regardless of party. Personally, other than bragging rights (I guess) I see no purpose in registering as an Independent. Unless of course, you fear the stigma of being labeled a Democrat.

[Guest]

Since you are ignorant of the law, it is useless to argue with you. I find it humorous that every time a liberal is losing a debate, they lose their cool and resort to derogatory comments and name calling. So be it.
Hilary broke the law. There is no denying that. It's just a matter of how it will be handled. Most likely nothing will be done about it. Today's socialist party will not throw one of their own to the dogs unless they displease the emperor.
Florida and eighteen other states have Closed Primary Elections where only members of a political party may vote in their Party's primary. Either you are not old enough to vote yet and don't understand the procedure, or you are a resident voter from another state and trolling the Villages forum. Personally, I don't care. Perhaps you will learn something on here. If Florida has changed their Independent voting procedure, then I am sure that someone will correct me. The only time an Independent can vote is in the general election. And then anyone can vote for the candidate of their choice regardless of party. Personally, other than bragging rights (I guess) I see no purpose in registering as an Independent. Unless of course, you fear the stigma of being labeled a Democrat.

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

[Guest]

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

:1rotfl::1rotfl::1rotfl:

You are so :censored: funny....only you think.

[Guest]

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

Me too. The only problem is deciding between all the ludicrous nimrods.

[Guest]

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

Congratulation:rolleyes:

[Guest]

You worked in federal government in IT. I guess the IT department you worked in was illogical thought, or maybe insane turds.

There was no LAW forbidding her from using her personal computer from government business. Rule is not a law. That rule was made law recently, but not made retroactive. All of her emails sent to government email addresses were kept on the person receiving computer. If the emails she destroyed were classified information sent to non-government people, she broke the law, and will face criminal charges.

All personal emails become government property once she used the server for government business. This has to be the most ludicrous statement ever posted here, and there isn't a close second. OK, Mr. IT answer this. "Why did Trey Gowdy ask Hillary to send her server to an independent third party? If he had very right to view her private emails, why not send the server directly to him? I know, Trey Gowdy, the prosecutor, doesn't know the law. Trey Gowdy is a Obama plant in the Republican party and he loves her so much, and would do nothing to embarrass her.

I know the primary process is. I am an Independent. I can change my party affiliation, when entering the polling booth, and change it back, when I leave. So, can you. When you enter the polling booth change from Republican to Democrat. Vote for the Democrat that has the best chance to beat Hillary, but not the Republican nominee. Then, change back. If the nominees are Hillary, and any other Republican other than Kasich, I will place a write in vote for Donald Duck.

Register to Vote or Update your Information - Division of Elections - Florida Department of State (http://dos.myflorida.com/elections/for-voters/voter-registration/register-to-vote-or-update-your-information/)


All party changes must be completed by the registration deadline, which is 29 days before the primary election. No voter should go to the polls thinking they can change parties on election day at the polling place.

[Guest]

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

A true American who understands the principles upon which the country was founded, and would never think of mocking the system.

Walk proud.

[Guest]

A true American who understands the principles upon which the country was founded, and would never think of mocking the system.

Walk proud.

Good luck with that. Mocking the system is how Obama got elected.

[Guest]

Heck, I have registered as a Republican so I can vote in their primary elections for the most ludicrous nimrod out there. :a20:

I knew I was right when I figured you to be ignorant or underage. Read back on your other post where you declared that you were an Independent. Do you mean registered Independent which means you are not a Republican, or Independent in like you are trying to move out of your parent's basement type independent?

[Guest]

I knew I was right when I figured you to be ignorant or underage. Read back on your other post where you declared that you were an Independent. Do you mean registered Independent which means you are not a Republican, or Independent in like you are trying to move out of your parent's basement type independent?

He or she probably meant that his or her incoherent ramblings where independent of thought.

[Guest]

He or she probably meant that his or her incoherent ramblings where independent of thought.

:D Good one.

[Guest]

Lose a debate. Hillary broke the law. How do you debate someone that throws out total false statements, and refuses to answer any question direct at them concerning the false statements? Then, they justify their stupidity by saying the President won't prosecute her, because she is one of her his own.

The only frustration that I have is thinking I am actually talking to adults. How come you didn't answer the question about Trey Gowdy? If Hillary's personal server was government property the second she used it for government business, why did he demand that Hillary send the server to an independent third party instead of himself? We know the answer to that question, her personal server ISN'T government property.

I am a resident of the friendliest home town in Florida. Just look at this site, and you can see how friendly everyone is especially the far right. Maybe the friendly behavior is only directed to people of their own ilk, and dare I say color. It is impossible to wipe the stupid smile off their face. That is why they can't answer any question directed at them. They don't want to lose the good mode they are always in. Any attempt to bring them back to the real world will result in naming calling of biblical proportion.

Unlike every far right closed minded individual here , I will admit, when I am wrong. Unlike the state, which I was a resident until 2012, Florida requires changing party affiliation 29 days before a primary. My former state didn't. So, I was wrong about the timing for changing parties. But the principle remains the same, I can vote for Sanders or Kasich. I just have to identify a party 29 days before the election. My man Kasich is in the Aug 6th debate, if the polls remain as is today. My man just to it in first gear. Bush and Walker pull over. You are about to be passed.

[Guest]

Lose a debate. Hillary broke the law. How do you debate someone that throws out total false statements, and refuses to answer any question direct at them concerning the false statements? Then, they justify their stupidity by saying the President won't prosecute her, because she is one of her his own.

The only frustration that I have is thinking I am actually talking to adults. How come you didn't answer the question about Trey Gowdy? If Hillary's personal server was government property the second she used it for government business, why did he demand that Hillary send the server to an independent third party instead of himself? We know the answer to that question, her personal server ISN'T government property.

I am a resident of the friendliest home town in Florida. Just look at this site, and you can see how friendly everyone is especially the far right. Maybe the friendly behavior is only directed to people of their own ilk, and dare I say color. It is impossible to wipe the stupid smile off their face. That is why they can't answer any question directed at them. They don't want to lose the good mode they are always in. Any attempt to bring them back to the real world will result in naming calling of biblical proportion.

Unlike every far right closed minded individual here , I will admit, when I am wrong. Unlike the state, which I was a resident until 2012, Florida requires changing party affiliation 29 days before a primary. My former state didn't. So, I was wrong about the timing for changing parties. But the principle remains the same, I can vote for Sanders or Kasich. I just have to identify a party 29 days before the election. My man Kasich is in the Aug 6th debate, if the polls remain as is today. My man just to it in first gear. Bush and Walker pull over. You are about to be passed.



"The chairman of the House Committee on Benghazi is formally requesting Hillary Clinton turn over her private email server to a third party for a “neutral” investigation of its contents.


Rep. Trey Gowdy wrote to Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, Thursday asking the former secretary of state to make the server available to the State Department’s inspector general “or another neutral, detached, and independent arbiter.”



Read more: Trey Gowdy to Hillary Clinton lawyer: Turn over server to third party - Lauren French and Josh Gerstein - POLITICO (http://www.politico.com/story/2015/03/trey-gowdy-hillary-clinton-email-server-116268.html#ixzz3hPexijk3)

[Guest]

Lose a debate. Hillary broke the law. How do you debate someone that throws out total false statements, and refuses to answer any question direct at them concerning the false statements? Then, they justify their stupidity by saying the President won't prosecute her, because she is one of her his own.

The only frustration that I have is thinking I am actually talking to adults. How come you didn't answer the question about Trey Gowdy? If Hillary's personal server was government property the second she used it for government business, why did he demand that Hillary send the server to an independent third party instead of himself? We know the answer to that question, her personal server ISN'T government property.

I am a resident of the friendliest home town in Florida. Just look at this site, and you can see how friendly everyone is especially the far right. Maybe the friendly behavior is only directed to people of their own ilk, and dare I say color. It is impossible to wipe the stupid smile off their face. That is why they can't answer any question directed at them. They don't want to lose the good mode they are always in. Any attempt to bring them back to the real world will result in naming calling of biblical proportion.

Unlike every far right closed minded individual here , I will admit, when I am wrong. Unlike the state, which I was a resident until 2012, Florida requires changing party affiliation 29 days before a primary. My former state didn't. So, I was wrong about the timing for changing parties. But the principle remains the same, I can vote for Sanders or Kasich. I just have to identify a party 29 days before the election. My man Kasich is in the Aug 6th debate, if the polls remain as is today. My man just to it in first gear. Bush and Walker pull over. You are about to be passed.

Knew you couldn't go away quietly. Had to make one more mindless attack on our community as a ploy to divert from the subject.
And Kasich is conservative so I doubt you would entertain a whim to vote for him, so that statement is hardly credible. If you are having a hard time trying to decide between a socialist and a conservative then you flip-flop more than the current resident in the White House. At any rate, it just lends more credence to what some on here thought of you, that you are a political troll. Of course, I could care less. Your posts are entertaining on a rainy and boring day.

[Guest]

You are so busy trying to attack anyone that doesn't agree with you that you turn around and make his case for him.

The original statement that was made by a former government IT person was, When Hillary used her personal server for government business, it became government property. Is there any doubt that that statement was made? Did I make up the above statement? Did I misinterpret the above statement? Is there any doubt what the statement says? No! Good! Let's proceed.

Look above at the statements highlighted in red. Now read what comes next very carefully, and very slowly. Logic 101. If Hillary's personal server was government property, why didn't Trey Gowdy request no demand that she send her former server, which is now government property, to HIM DIRECTLY? Why send it to a third party? All Hillary's personal emails on her former server were government property to do with as they saw fit. The only logical conclusion is Hillary's personal server is still her personal property, and not government property.

Concerning the person that highlighted items above in red, I am pretty sure you are a reasonable person. Do you think that Hillary's personal server became government property, when she used it for government business despite any evidence to the contrary?

Concerning the whatever that posted directly below him, what a matter didn't mommy give you enough attention, when you were a baby. This could be the sixth time that I said this. I will vote for a Republican governor that accepted the Medicaid provision under the ACA, because that governor puts the people in his state before his party. That is a man of character. I don't want Hillary to be the next president. That is why I would vote for Sanders. It has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with her. A vote for Sanders is a vote against Hillary. Please save your stupid statements for someone that actually gives a crap.

[Guest]

You are so busy trying to attack anyone that doesn't agree with you that you turn around and make his case for him.

The original statement that was made by a former government IT person was, When Hillary used her personal server for government business, it became government property. Is there any doubt that that statement was made? Did I make up the above statement? Did I misinterpret the above statement? Is there any doubt what the statement says? No! Good! Let's proceed.

Look above at the statements highlighted in red. Now read what comes next very carefully, and very slowly. Logic 101. If Hillary's personal server was government property, why didn't Trey Gowdy request no demand that she send her former server, which is now government property, to HIM DIRECTLY? Why send it to a third party? All Hillary's personal emails on her former server were government property to do with as they saw fit. The only logical conclusion is Hillary's personal server is still her personal property, and not government property.

Concerning the person that highlighted items above in red, I am pretty sure you are a reasonable person. Do you think that Hillary's personal server became government property, when she used it for government business despite any evidence to the contrary?

Concerning the whatever that posted directly below him, what a matter didn't mommy give you enough attention, when you were a baby. This could be the sixth time that I said this. I will vote for a Republican governor that accepted the Medicaid provision under the ACA, because that governor puts the people in his state before his party. That is a man of character. I don't want Hillary to be the next president. That is why I would vote for Sanders. It has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with her. A vote for Sanders is a vote against Hillary. Please save your stupid statements for someone that actually gives a crap.

Ooo, don't have a temper tantrum. :cryin2:
You can't quite make up your mind, huh? Sanders-socialist or Kasich-conservative. What a conundrum, right?

I do not know what drives congress and their decisions regarding the Clinton felony. I do know this particular law, contrary to what you pretend to know. You seem to be hung up on diverting and possibly confusing someone off subject. If you didn't go off on a tangent, maybe you wouldn't be called out for your mistakes. Take a rest, you have earned your money for the night.

[Guest]

You are so busy trying to attack anyone that doesn't agree with you that you turn around and make his case for him.

The original statement that was made by a former government IT person was, When Hillary used her personal server for government business, it became government property. Is there any doubt that that statement was made? Did I make up the above statement? Did I misinterpret the above statement? Is there any doubt what the statement says? No! Good! Let's proceed.

Look above at the statements highlighted in red. Now read what comes next very carefully, and very slowly. Logic 101. If Hillary's personal server was government property, why didn't Trey Gowdy request no demand that she send her former server, which is now government property, to HIM DIRECTLY? Why send it to a third party? All Hillary's personal emails on her former server were government property to do with as they saw fit. The only logical conclusion is Hillary's personal server is still her personal property, and not government property.

Concerning the person that highlighted items above in red, I am pretty sure you are a reasonable person. Do you think that Hillary's personal server became government property, when she used it for government business despite any evidence to the contrary?

Concerning the whatever that posted directly below him, what a matter didn't mommy give you enough attention, when you were a baby. This could be the sixth time that I said this. I will vote for a Republican governor that accepted the Medicaid provision under the ACA, because that governor puts the people in his state before his party. That is a man of character. I don't want Hillary to be the next president. That is why I would vote for Sanders. It has nothing to do with him, and everything to do with her. A vote for Sanders is a vote against Hillary. Please save your stupid statements for someone that actually gives a crap.

"The chairman of the House Committee on Benghazi is formally requesting Hillary Clinton turn over her private email server to a third party for a “neutral” investigation of its contents.


Rep. Trey Gowdy wrote to Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, Thursday asking the former secretary of state to make the server available to the State Department’s inspector general “or another neutral, detached, and independent arbiter.”

[Guest]

"The chairman of the House Committee on Benghazi is formally requesting Hillary Clinton turn over her private email server to a third party for a “neutral” investigation of its contents.


Rep. Trey Gowdy wrote to Clinton’s lawyer, David Kendall, Thursday asking the former secretary of state to make the server available to the State Department’s inspector general “or another neutral, detached, and independent arbiter.”

Poster keeps asking the same question......why was the server not asked to be sent direct.

Twice now, the poster got the answer....next time Mike it brighter red and even bigger.

Gowdy is a smart lawer, former D.A. and federal prosecutor. He will do all by the book.

[Guest]

Try a third time. This time make it even bigger. How about this you acknowledge you were dead wrong. HILLARY"S PRIVATE SERVER ISN"T GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!

If her private server was government property, why did Trey Gowdy ask for government property to be sent to an independent third party? As a lawyer, Trey Gowdy knows that it isn't GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!!!

HER PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER You made it bigger that life. What is the matter! Apparently, you couldn't find anywhere the statement GOVERNMENT PROPERTY IN HILLARY"S POSSESSION!!!!!!!!

Your inability to answer the question asked, fits perfectly in the mold of the current right wing of the lunatic fringe. The far right wing thinks they are gods; therefore, only answerable to themselves. The lower class, the open minded, are never right. They have to accept every answer given by the far right, even though the answer will never have anything to do with the question asked.

[Guest]

Try a third time. This time make it even bigger. How about this you acknowledge you were dead wrong. HILLARY"S PRIVATE SERVER ISN"T GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!

If her private server was government property, why did Trey Gowdy ask for government property to be sent to an independent third party? As a lawyer, Trey Gowdy knows that it isn't GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!!!

HER PRIVATE EMAIL SERVER You made it bigger that life. What is the matter! Apparently, you couldn't find anywhere the statement GOVERNMENT PROPERTY IN HILLARY"S POSSESSION!!!!!!!!

Your inability to answer the question asked, fits perfectly in the mold of the current right wing of the lunatic fringe. The far right wing thinks they are gods; therefore, only answerable to themselves. The lower class, the open minded, are never right. They have to accept every answer given by the far right, even though the answer will never have anything to do with the question asked.

I am not getting sucked into this kind of conversation.

All of this is a recall of hubby Bill asking for the definition of sex. It is always the same.

Done....if you are happy calling me and others lunatics...fine...enjoy your self and parse all the sentences...that is the Clinton way, and it appears it will stay that way....winning is everything and the law be damned.

[Guest]

And the question asked was why was it asked to be sent to a third party and that was answered. I never engaged, nor will engage into a conversation about Government property. I turned off President Clinton when he asked for the definition of sex and will turn off Hillary and her staff of lawyers parsing the law....

[Guest]

Of course, you are not going to get sucked into this kind of conversation, because you live on a lovely one way street. When your tactics are used against you, you run for cover, and cry foul. How dare you use my tactics against me!!! That is so un-American.

GUILT BY SILENCE!! HILLARY'S PRIVATE SERVER IS NOT GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!! WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO ACKNOWLEDGE?

You are a direct reflection of the far right wing of the Republican party. There is no law against ever admitting you are wrong. The one name that you will never have to be worried about being called is HONEST.

[Guest]

Of course, you are not going to get sucked into this kind of conversation, because you live on a lovely one way street. When your tactics are used against you, you run for cover, and cry foul. How dare you use my tactics against me!!! That is so un-American.

GUILT BY SILENCE!! HILLARY'S PRIVATE SERVER IS NOT GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!! WHY IS THAT SO HARD TO ACKNOWLEDGE?

You are a direct reflection of the far right wing of the Republican party. There is no law against ever admitting you are wrong. The one name that you will never have to be worried about being called is HONEST.

A poster on TOTV forum is "guilty by silence"

What a friendly open place this is......see ya

[Guest]

Gowdy: 'Our Committee Doesn't Have the Power' to Seize Hillary's Email Server (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/gowdy-our-committee-doesnt-have-power-seize-hillarys-email-server)


Back in March, Trey Gowdy said on Morning Joe that his committee does not have subpoena power over private property, which the email server clearly is private property.

Google it and find thousands of links on the subject.

[Guest]

Gowdy: 'Our Committee Doesn't Have the Power' to Seize Hillary's Email Server (http://cnsnews.com/news/article/susan-jones/gowdy-our-committee-doesnt-have-power-seize-hillarys-email-server)


Back in March, Trey Gowdy said on Morning Joe that his committee does not have subpoena power over private property, which the email server clearly is private property.

Google it and find thousands of links on the subject.

While the server is not government property, any all, email set from Hillary to any government agency (including those from her personal server) ARE government property. Yet, she picks and chooses which emails get released.
She certainly isn't going to release any email that implicates her in anything. Liberals don't seem to have a problem with this. It really says a lot about their ethics, or should I say lack of ethics.

[Guest]

While the server is not government property, any all, email set from Hillary to any government agency (including those from her personal server) ARE government property. Yet, she picks and chooses which emails get released.
She certainly isn't going to release any email that implicates her in anything. Liberals don't seem to have a problem with this. It really says a lot about their ethics, or should I say lack of ethics.


Good news! Hundreds of thousands of Hillary's emails will be released by the State Department today around 6:00pm, so the press and all the Hillary haters have their week-end fun laid out for them. Enjoy!

[Guest]

Good news! Hundreds of thousands of Hillary's emails will be released by the State Department today around 6:00pm, so the press and all the Hillary haters have their week-end fun laid out for them. Enjoy!

You mean the ones that she had screened and cleared for release?:1rotfl:

[Guest]

Post# 17. There IS federal law against what she did. I know because I worked for the Dept of State in IT. She has NO private emails once she admits that she was using the server for gov work. All her work becomes gov property, including anything private she puts on it. Sorry, but once again you have been proven wrong

Post# 22 All personal emails become government property once she used the server for government business. OK, Mr. IT answer this. "Why did Trey Gowdy ask Hillary to send her server to an independent third party? If he had very right to view her private emails, why not send the server directly to himself?

Post# 34 How come you didn't answer the question about Trey Gowdy? If Hillary's personal server was government property the second she used it for government business, why did he demand that Hillary send the server to an independent third party instead of himself? We know the answer to that question, her personal server ISN'T government property.

Post# 42 Try a third time. HILLARY"S PRIVATE SERVER ISN"T GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!

If her private server was government property, why did Trey Gowdy ask for government property to be sent to an independent third party? As a lawyer, Trey Gowdy knows that it isn't GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!!!

Where was the question answered? I do have to admit that question did change a little. It was my mistake, and it wasn't intention. The original comment was contents on her server was government property, as I stated in post 22. In post 34 and 42, I stated that the server was government property. However, the jest of the question is still the same, whether the server or just the contents were government property doesn't matter. Trey Gowdy asked either of the above be sent to an independent third party. The only logical conclusion is that her private emails aren't government property as was stated in post 17. No one has contracted this. If so, what post?

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1093729]Post# 17. There IS federal law against what she did. I know because I worked for the Dept of State in IT. QUOTE]

Wow, a GS-335-5 Computer Assistant knows the CFR's? Impressive! :1rotfl:

[Guest]

No one has contracted this. That should be contradicted this. I am sorry, but I had to ruin mister correction's good time in pointing out spelling errors instead of ever addressing the contents of a post. The next time that he doesn't call a person a name will be the first.

[Guest]

The guest format certainly makes conversations like this one hard to follow, but it seems to me that at least one poster here seems to be splitting hairs. The bottom line question in my opinion is, why would anyone NOT want to know if the person seeking the highest office in the land was careless enough to use her personal computer for classified information? Talk about going to the polling booth with blinders on.......how can that not be important information that one would want to know?!?

[Guest]

Post# 17. There IS federal law against what she did. I know because I worked for the Dept of State in IT. She has NO private emails once she admits that she was using the server for gov work. All her work becomes gov property, including anything private she puts on it. Sorry, but once again you have been proven wrong

Post# 22 All personal emails become government property once she used the server for government business. OK, Mr. IT answer this. "Why did Trey Gowdy ask Hillary to send her server to an independent third party? If he had very right to view her private emails, why not send the server directly to himself?

Post# 34 How come you didn't answer the question about Trey Gowdy? If Hillary's personal server was government property the second she used it for government business, why did he demand that Hillary send the server to an independent third party instead of himself? We know the answer to that question, her personal server ISN'T government property.

Post# 42 Try a third time. HILLARY"S PRIVATE SERVER ISN"T GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!

If her private server was government property, why did Trey Gowdy ask for government property to be sent to an independent third party? As a lawyer, Trey Gowdy knows that it isn't GOVERNMENT PROPERTY!!!!!!!

Where was the question answered? I do have to admit that question did change a little. It was my mistake, and it wasn't intention. The original comment was contents on her server was government property, as I stated in post 22. In post 34 and 42, I stated that the server was government property. However, the jest of the question is still the same, whether the server or just the contents were government property doesn't matter. Trey Gowdy asked either of the above be sent to an independent third party. The only logical conclusion is that her private emails aren't government property as was stated in post 17. No one has contracted this. If so, what post?

Who cares

No matter what, we will spend the next 15 months with Ms Clinton, as mentioned earlier, parsing every word as her husband did when he was lying.

And those of you who love this rich, scandal ridden lady will defend her over and over.

She is a liar, manipulator and you seem to be one of her "manipulatees"

How the Democratic Party allowed themselves to get stuck like this is certainly "book worthy"

Every scandal, and every breath of scandal about her, and I do realize that none of this should reflect on her in anyway. It is either that doggone right wing conspiracy or the fault of George Bush.

You can call everyone on here all the names you wish, you are dreaming if you think this is the last scandal or that this woman deserves your trust.

Argue with the parsing, but as in her husbands case, she is not a truthful person, so stand up and be counted.

[Guest]

The guest format certainly makes conversations like this one hard to follow, but it seems to me that at least one poster here seems to be splitting hairs. The bottom line question in my opinion is, why would anyone NOT want to know if the person seeking the highest office in the land was careless enough to use her personal computer for classified information? Talk about going to the polling booth with blinders on.......how can that not be important information that one would want to know?!?

Excellent point! But, as you have seen by the last presidential election (and possibly the 1st) there are those that do NOT care whether the person is qualified or fit for the job, but just whether or not they promise the golden handout. And, then there was the large black turn out that voted purely because he was black. I am sure that many of his votes came from uninformed voters, because otherwise they would have had to be stupid.

[Guest]

[QUOTE=Guest;1093729]Post# 17. There IS federal law against what she did. I know because I worked for the Dept of State in IT. QUOTE]

Wow, a GS-335-5 Computer Assistant knows the CFR's? Impressive! :1rotfl:

They don't use the GS system of ranking in the State Dept :censored:
But, you got your five minutes of attention. By the way, how much are they paying political trolls today?

I guess if you are wrong, then attack the person, not the subject. Clinton broke federal law. Now it is up to her superiors as to whether or not they treat her as she would have treated anyone working for her, or not. I doubt anything will be done to her. I am sure they will investigate the whistle blower.

[Guest]

Is this still the US? Innocent until proven guilty seems only to apply to Democrats. Splitting hairs! When you are asked a question, how about doing something that is totally out of character, and answer the question. If you haven't noticed, not one Republican here has ever admitted ever being wrong. When they are wrong on a thread, they just stop posting on the thread.


All of President Obama's trumped up scandals, and Hillary's to date don't amount to a pi$$ hole in the snow to people that are open minded. The only thing that they are good for is to give the Republicans in Congress something to do. This enables them to feel good about themselves, and gives them talking points back in the home districts/states.

I think that a lot of Republicans here have a memory of convenience. I seem to be one of her lap dogs. That is truly funny. I am not going to go back and find out how many times I have said the following. Hillary has been running for president since the mid 90's. No woman would stand by her man, after her man subjected her to worldwide humiliation, if she didn't need him for something. Her something was the Senate first, and then the White House becoming multi-millionaires was a side benefit.

If John Kasich isn't the Republicans choice for president, I am going to vote for Donald Duck. I want our next president to be someone that puts party affiliation aside as much as possible, and works with the other side for the good of all Americans. He seems to be the only one now that fits the bill.

The Republicans wouldn't have the control of the Senate and House, if it wasn't for President Obama's color, and Gerrymandering. Voting based on color is a two way street. Does anybody think for a second the Tea Party wasn't given birth, because of His Blackness? I am amazed that anyone would even throw out there that Republicans are the only ones that are well informed, vote base upon a person's record, and the policies that he will bring with him to the White House.

Name Calling! I wasn't on this board five minutes, and was called so many names that I thought they were handing out prices for rudeness here.

[Guest]

Is this still the US? Innocent until proven guilty seems only to apply to Democrats. Splitting hairs! When you are asked a question, how about doing something that is totally out of character, and answer the question. If you haven't noticed, not one Republican here has ever admitted ever being wrong. When they are wrong on a thread, they just stop posting on the thread.


All of President Obama's trumped up scandals, and Hillary's to date don't amount to a pi$$ hole in the snow to people that are open minded. The only thing that they are good for is to give the Republicans in Congress something to do. This enables them to feel good about themselves, and gives them talking points back in the home districts/states.

I think that a lot of Republicans here have a memory of convenience. I seem to be one of her lap dogs. That is truly funny. I am not going to go back and find out how many times I have said the following. Hillary has been running for president since the mid 90's. No woman would stand by her man, after her man subjected her to worldwide humiliation, if she didn't need him for something. Her something was the Senate first, and then the White House becoming multi-millionaires was a side benefit.

If John Kasich isn't the Republicans choice for president, I am going to vote for Donald Duck. I want our next president to be someone that puts party affiliation aside as much as possible, and works with the other side for the good of all Americans. He seems to be the only one now that fits the bill.

The Republicans wouldn't have the control of the Senate and House, if it wasn't for President Obama's color, and Gerrymandering. Voting based on color is a two way street. Does anybody think for a second the Tea Party wasn't given birth, because of His Blackness? I am amazed that anyone would even throw out there that Republicans are the only ones that are well informed, vote base upon a person's record, and the policies that he will bring with him to the White House.

Name Calling! I wasn't on this board five minutes, and was called so many names that I thought they were handing out prices for rudeness here.

You do have a "different" way of seeing things. I really do feel sorry that someone called you a name....just kidding. I don't recall anyone calling you a name. You may have been labeled due to your obnoxious and rude comments to other posters.
If you think that we have a Republican majority in congress due to Obama's color, I can't say what I want to say about your mentality because that really would be rude and my wife would probably pull my ear. Obama has been given more passes than ANY OTHER president in history, save maybe Clinton. No, even more than Clinton. Now, THAT may have been due to his color....probably was. We have a Republican majority in congress due to his and Democrat policies. And if you don't believe that, then do your own poll and ask the voters. Maybe you don't agree with polls unless they favor your party.

But, please don't go away mad.....naw, go ahead. Just kidding.

[Guest]

Is this still the US? Innocent until proven guilty seems only to apply to Democrats. Splitting hairs! When you are asked a question, how about doing something that is totally out of character, and answer the question. If you haven't noticed, not one Republican here has ever admitted ever being wrong. When they are wrong on a thread, they just stop posting on the thread.


All of President Obama's trumped up scandals, and Hillary's to date don't amount to a pi$$ hole in the snow to people that are open minded. The only thing that they are good for is to give the Republicans in Congress something to do. This enables them to feel good about themselves, and gives them talking points back in the home districts/states.

I think that a lot of Republicans here have a memory of convenience. I seem to be one of her lap dogs. That is truly funny. I am not going to go back and find out how many times I have said the following. Hillary has been running for president since the mid 90's. No woman would stand by her man, after her man subjected her to worldwide humiliation, if she didn't need him for something. Her something was the Senate first, and then the White House becoming multi-millionaires was a side benefit.

If John Kasich isn't the Republicans choice for president, I am going to vote for Donald Duck. I want our next president to be someone that puts party affiliation aside as much as possible, and works with the other side for the good of all Americans. He seems to be the only one now that fits the bill.

The Republicans wouldn't have the control of the Senate and House, if it wasn't for President Obama's color, and Gerrymandering. Voting based on color is a two way street. Does anybody think for a second the Tea Party wasn't given birth, because of His Blackness? I am amazed that anyone would even throw out there that Republicans are the only ones that are well informed, vote base upon a person's record, and the policies that he will bring with him to the White House.

Name Calling! I wasn't on this board five minutes, and was called so many names that I thought they were handing out prices for rudeness here.

All I want to do is ask this poster just a few things. Engaging in discussion does not seem to be the strong point of this poster.

1. You level and have leveled some accusations at "Republicans" on this board. How do you know the party affiliation of the posters ?

2. You level a lot of accusations based on the Presidents race, more than once or twice. I find that to be offensive and ask what color has to do with it ? You level the same charge at the Tea Party and before you accuse, I am not a member. THOSE are charges leveled at the lowest street level of democratic politics. They do not, nor ever have had any credence, and allow me once again to express my disgust with your constant talk of race. THAT issue is one brought up only by democrats who do not understand the policies. If you oppose someone and they happen to be black, you are NOT a racist but that seems to be mantra which I thought had begun to die until you.

3. Your comments about trumped up charges that are leveled only at Democrats manifests your total lack of knowledge. And since they do not amount to whatever gross expression you used, then I suppose the majority of americans not trusting your candidate is just as she always says another right wing conspiracy.

There is no perfection in person or party. Your posts are pretty much aimed at one defending another and that is your right, but base it on facts, and not on this stupid divisive race thing. If race was an issue, no matter how many black votes he got he would not be the President.

As far as name calling, you seem to excel and I sure wish we could extend the ignore button to political because you certainly deserve that.

You appear to be loaded with a lot of hate and again, that is ok if you want to unload it here but at least do it with facts.

Your candidate that you defend is not even trusted by most americans, yet you appear to trust her. I am not sure how you arrived at one of your many JUDGEMENTS about innocent before guilty but it sure is not based on any fact at all.

You make this about PARTY on almost every post. Try just once to focus on issues of character and trust. Have you read about the Swiss bank and their ties to the Foundation ? I know, again those doggone Republicans just saying those things. Have you read about all the women who are waiting in the wings to tell us about her hubby, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, what he said about his wife ?

There are more serious character issues involved in this campaign than I can recall ever. I am not speaking of religion, race or anything except SERIOUS character flaws and judgement flaws.

I leave you with the last few sentences of an op ed from today on Hillary Clinton entitled "The astonishing weakness of Hillary Clinton".

"Clinton just seems like a mismatch for the party and the moment. The center-left darling of Wall Street talking up issues of inequality. The former Walmart board member posing as savior of American jobs. The "Smart Power" leader whose achievement at state was wrecking a nation and turning it over to Sunni terrorists faster than George W. Bush. A champion of women who pretended the leader of the free world was the victim of his intern. The wife of a man who flies on the "Lolita Express" with a porn star that was booked for "massages." The vanquisher of a Yonkers mayor.

Is this really the best the Democrats can do? Yes, and that should worry them."

The astonishing weakness of Hillary Clinton (http://theweek.com/articles/569184/astonishing-weakness-hillary-clinton)

You can call everyone you want a racist,,,,Tea Party, Republicans, etc.....that has been going on since President Obama became a candidate, but for what is it worth, that kind of talk simply makes me stop reading. You claim NOT to be a supporter but spend most of your posts doing just that by attacking anyone who is NOT a supporter.

[Guest]

All I want to do is ask this poster just a few things. Engaging in discussion does not seem to be the strong point of this poster.

1. You level and have leveled some accusations at "Republicans" on this board. How do you know the party affiliation of the posters ?

2. You level a lot of accusations based on the Presidents race, more than once or twice. I find that to be offensive and ask what color has to do with it ? You level the same charge at the Tea Party and before you accuse, I am not a member. THOSE are charges leveled at the lowest street level of democratic politics. They do not, nor ever have had any credence, and allow me once again to express my disgust with your constant talk of race. THAT issue is one brought up only by democrats who do not understand the policies. If you oppose someone and they happen to be black, you are NOT a racist but that seems to be mantra which I thought had begun to die until you.

3. Your comments about trumped up charges that are leveled only at Democrats manifests your total lack of knowledge. And since they do not amount to whatever gross expression you used, then I suppose the majority of americans not trusting your candidate is just as she always says another right wing conspiracy.

There is no perfection in person or party. Your posts are pretty much aimed at one defending another and that is your right, but base it on facts, and not on this stupid divisive race thing. If race was an issue, no matter how many black votes he got he would not be the President.

As far as name calling, you seem to excel and I sure wish we could extend the ignore button to political because you certainly deserve that.

You appear to be loaded with a lot of hate and again, that is ok if you want to unload it here but at least do it with facts.

Your candidate that you defend is not even trusted by most americans, yet you appear to trust her. I am not sure how you arrived at one of your many JUDGEMENTS about innocent before guilty but it sure is not based on any fact at all.

You make this about PARTY on almost every post. Try just once to focus on issues of character and trust. Have you read about the Swiss bank and their ties to the Foundation ? I know, again those doggone Republicans just saying those things. Have you read about all the women who are waiting in the wings to tell us about her hubby, AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, what he said about his wife ?

There are more serious character issues involved in this campaign than I can recall ever. I am not speaking of religion, race or anything except SERIOUS character flaws and judgement flaws.

I leave you with the last few sentences of an op ed from today on Hillary Clinton entitled "The astonishing weakness of Hillary Clinton".

"Clinton just seems like a mismatch for the party and the moment. The center-left darling of Wall Street talking up issues of inequality. The former Walmart board member posing as savior of American jobs. The "Smart Power" leader whose achievement at state was wrecking a nation and turning it over to Sunni terrorists faster than George W. Bush. A champion of women who pretended the leader of the free world was the victim of his intern. The wife of a man who flies on the "Lolita Express" with a porn star that was booked for "massages." The vanquisher of a Yonkers mayor.

Is this really the best the Democrats can do? Yes, and that should worry them."

The astonishing weakness of Hillary Clinton (http://theweek.com/articles/569184/astonishing-weakness-hillary-clinton)

You can call everyone you want a racist,,,,Tea Party, Republicans, etc.....that has been going on since President Obama became a candidate, but for what is it worth, that kind of talk simply makes me stop reading. You claim NOT to be a supporter but spend most of your posts doing just that by attacking anyone who is NOT a supporter.

:BigApplause:

[Guest]

I noticed in the news today (might be old news but it drew my attention) that emails were found on Hillary's server that were addressed to five different intelligent organizations. They also found classified information and that is a violation because she did not have a certified storage facility in her home rated for storage of classified material. On top of that, classified information must be transmitted via encrypted mode of transfer if leaving a classified cleared facility. Now, Hillary could be charged with some very serious violations but I doubt she will be treated the same way as those that worked for her, that might have handled classified material carelessly. She is a blatant violator and will get a pass, no doubt. I wonder if it will even affect her campaign.

[Guest]

Good news! Hundreds of thousands of Hillary's emails will be released by the State Department today around 6:00pm, so the press and all the Hillary haters have their week-end fun laid out for them. Enjoy!

You mean the ones that she had screened and cleared for release?:1rotfl:

The fun thing about the email release is the Hillary haters and the press will spend the week-end pouring over emails looking for that smoking gun, while Hillary will be relaxing in the Hamptons.

BTW: The Clintons today released all their tax returns dating back to 2007. They paid an effective 47% tax rate when state and local taxes were factored in.

Hillary Clinton's doctor also offered a medical report today saying she is 100% healthy enough to be president.

[Guest]

The fun thing about the email release is the Hillary haters and the press will spend the week-end pouring over emails looking for that smoking gun, while Hillary will be relaxing in the Hamptons.

BTW: The Clintons today released all their tax returns dating back to 2007. They paid an effective 47% tax rate when state and local taxes were factored in.

Hillary Clinton's doctor also offered a medical report today saying she is 100% healthy enough to be president.

You might be relaxing but Clinton for sure is not.

You forgot to mention that the classified info on her private server is against the law. Her lawyers will try to make it sound like so what she did not do anything illegal.
EXCEPT it was also announced today tha her lawyer has a thhumb drive with the classified documents on it....also very much agaist the law. Even when in a federally secured server it would be against the law for him to have classified documents. So to have a private server, against the law and passing classified documents to a civilian, against the law.....her proare just beginning. She is tainted....damaged goods...a liar...untrustworthy....dishonest.....and her ratings are tanking.....people do not like her including thinking democrats.

Joe Biden, shine up those track shoes......the dems need your help.

[Guest]

The fun thing about the email release is the Hillary haters and the press will spend the week-end pouring over emails looking for that smoking gun, while Hillary will be relaxing in the Hamptons.

BTW: The Clintons today released all their tax returns dating back to 2007. They paid an effective 47% tax rate when state and local taxes were factored in.

Hillary Clinton's doctor also offered a medical report today saying she is 100% healthy enough to be president.

To this poster who seems giddy that Ms Clinton is releasing emails in pieces, and that she paid taxes, and is healthy.

Do you really and truely trust this woman ?

Can you speak to the disaster in Libya ? Can you speak to the bank in Switzerland, and I use that only as the last example of influence pandering ? Can you speak to the affair in Benghazi ? Can you speak to her racial rants, validated by police reports both in Arkansas and DC ? Can you speak to those women with whom her husband slept with who are publicly agonizing over her being in the WH ? Can you speak to her "Bill Clinton manner" of parsing little words to protect from criminal behavior ? Can you recall, other than her husband, any candidate for the WH ever having to do that ?

There are many more, but I do not want to ruin your glee in some emails finally being released, and learning she pays taxes and is in good health ?

Can you address the many conflicts in what she says today versus what she did in the past, for example on Wall St. ? Can you speak to her conflicting stands and outright hypocrisy on inequality ?

But she paid taxes, she released a few (less than scheduled) and is in good health, so I guess all is fine in your world.

[Guest]

My gosh! How can anyone in their right mind vote for this candidate? She is entirely without credibility. She cannot tell the truth. She lies. :ohdear:

Oh yeah, her name is Carly Farina!:1rotfl:

[Guest]

My gosh! How can anyone in their right mind vote for this candidate? She is entirely without credibility. She cannot tell the truth. She lies. :ohdear:

Oh yeah, her name is Carly Farina!:1rotfl:

The thread is about Ms Clinton, but for me I will cut you a break on one condition....that you cite the lies she told....I am talking specifics. Thanks and then maybe I can share some character stories of truth with links and credits for MS Clinton, but you first.

And frankly i know very little about Ms Fiorina, so it will be helpful to know,

Oh and you misspelled her name....I am sure in error but looking forward to your presentation make general comments about people calling them liars without any back up and then to misspell their name.

Very immature and childish and glad nobody would do that on here.looking forward to reading.

[Guest]

After four or eight years with the Clintons back in the White House, posters on this forum will be looking back at President Obama with fond memories.

[Guest]

The thread is about Ms Clinton, but for me I will cut you a break on one condition....that you cite the lies she told....I am talking specifics. Thanks and then maybe I can share some character stories of truth with links and credits for MS Clinton, but you first.

And frankly i know very little about Ms Fiorina, so it will be helpful to know,

Oh and you misspelled her name....I am sure in error but looking forward to your presentation make general comments about people calling them liars without any back up and then to misspell their name.

Very immature and childish and glad nobody would do that on here.looking forward to reading.

Get back in your troll hole and crawl back into your cave. You are not relevant.

[Guest]

Get back in your troll hole and crawl back into your cave. You are not relevant.

I realize that but still look forward to having someone actually back up claims of lies....would be refreshing.

Sorry....I realize that those of us who are beneath your level of understanding and communication do sort of get in the way of adult conversation so will try to be more conscious of your feelings.

Just keep us advised on what you might wear on the first day of school so we can hang out with you and the cool kids.

[Guest]

Get back in your troll hole and crawl back into your cave. You are not relevant.

You are like a broken record. It's as if you only have a few lines of communication that you are capable of expressing and you just keep repeating them over and over and over again. Now look in the mirror and tell us again who is not relevant.

[Guest]

There are three people here that posts are more than one or two paragraphs. They are you, Personal Best Regards, and me. The two of you always read into to my mind, and I am always being accused by you two of not knowing the facts, filled with hate, and name calling. So, that must make me a moron, the devil, and a child. So, I am a triple threat.

I looked for my first post, but couldn't find it. However, I did find one of my first posts, and guess you popped up on it, yourself, and Personal Best Regards. It is on page two Clinton vs who. Go back and read it. It won't take long. These are three the gems there (1) Republicans haven't moved at all. It is the Democrats that have moved far left. (2) Keep drinking the Kool Aid. Your stupid comments (3) Age of Fox news viewers, you are aged bias.

I have been called a racist numerous times. Liar and moron seems to be names of choice. There is one poster has never respond once without calling me a name. His posts are never more than one paragraph long. so, he is a man of few words.

You have no idea what my personality is. None. I have never gotten angry or raised my voice in the past 40 years. I have said it before being loud doesn't make you right. Highlighting words/phrases or coloring them is the same as raising your voice. This post was the first time that I did that out of shear frustration. Go back, and you can see why.

How many times have I asked questions that you couldn't answer? The reason you couldn't answer them was you would have to admit you were wrong. Has any Republican here, we know who the Republicans are, ever admitted to be wrong? If you can't tell, who the Republicans are on this board, you are not looking. Do you think that any Democrat on this board has ever attacked me? I have corrected my mistakes very time that I knew that I made a misstatement. My ego isn't so great that I can't admit that I made a mistake. There is no loss of self-esteem by admitted to a misstatement. People that point out the misstatement aren't going to be reward by going straight to heaven upon death.

Why did Glenn Beck get bounced from Fox News? At the first rally in Washington, how many Tea Party people had posters of President Obama posing as Hitler? "Get our country back! Birthers! Barack Hussane (sp) Obama. You don't think his name, or color sparks racial hatred from the right.

Are blacks racists? You damn right there are, and black racists go back to the 60's, and 70's. We grew up in that period, and we were expected to pay for our fathers sins. At that time, the blacks didn't want to be equal. They wanted to be more equal.

The blacks have their man in there, and they are taking advantage of the situation. Why shouldn't they? The media both left and right are feeding the situation. The core of the Black Lives Matter group will be a problem for years to come no matter who the president is. I am comfortable in my skin, and I know that I am not a racist. Hell, I am a dark Italian. I went back to Boston last summer, and visited my former black banker. She laughed, when she saw me. I was darker than she was.

I am actually having fun here. Sarcasm is my weapon of choice. Am I angry? Not even close.

[Guest]

There are three people here that posts are more than one or two paragraphs. They are you, Personal Best Regards, and me. The two of you always read into to my mind, and I am always being accused by you two of not knowing the facts, filled with hate, and name calling. So, that must make me a moron, the devil, and a child. So, I am a triple threat.

I looked for my first post, but couldn't find it. However, I did find one of my first posts, and guess you popped up on it, yourself, and Personal Best Regards. It is on page two Clinton vs who. Go back and read it. It won't take long. These are three the gems there (1) Republicans haven't moved at all. It is the Democrats that have moved far left. (2) Keep drinking the Kool Aid. Your stupid comments (3) Age of Fox news viewers, you are aged bias.

I have been called a racist numerous times. Liar and moron seems to be names of choice. There is one poster has never respond once without calling me a name. His posts are never more than one paragraph long. so, he is a man of few words.

You have no idea what my personality is. None. I have never gotten angry or raised my voice in the past 40 years. I have said it before being loud doesn't make you right. Highlighting words/phrases or coloring them is the same as raising your voice. This post was the first time that I did that out of shear frustration. Go back, and you can see why.

How many times have I asked questions that you couldn't answer? The reason you couldn't answer them was you would have to admit you were wrong. Has any Republican here, we know who the Republicans are, ever admitted to be wrong? If you can't tell, who the Republicans are on this board, you are not looking. Do you think that any Democrat on this board has ever attacked me? I have corrected my mistakes very time that I knew that I made a misstatement. My ego isn't so great that I can't admit that I made a mistake. There is no loss of self-esteem by admitted to a misstatement. People that point out the misstatement aren't going to be reward by going straight to heaven upon death.

Why did Glenn Beck get bounced from Fox News? At the first rally in Washington, how many Tea Party people had posters of President Obama posing as Hitler? "Get our country back! Birthers! Barack Hussane (sp) Obama. You don't think his name, or color sparks racial hatred from the right.

Are blacks racists? You damn right there are, and black racists go back to the 60's, and 70's. We grew up in that period, and we were expected to pay for our fathers sins. At that time, the blacks didn't want to be equal. They wanted to be more equal.

The blacks have their man in there, and they are taking advantage of the situation. Why shouldn't they? The media both left and right are feeding the situation. The core of the Black Lives Matter group will be a problem for years to come no matter who the president is. I am comfortable in my skin, and I know that I am not a racist. Hell, I am a dark Italian. I went back to Boston last summer, and visited my former black banker. She laughed, when she saw me. I was darker than she was.

I am actually having fun here. Sarcasm is my weapon of choice. Am I angry? Not even close.

Given that brevity is the soul of wit, you fail.

[Guest]

My gosh! How can anyone in their right mind vote for this candidate? She is entirely without credibility. She cannot tell the truth. She lies. :ohdear:

Oh yeah, her name is Carly Farina!:1rotfl:

How about you go back to 2nd grade ... and learn how to spell?

[Guest]

Given that brevity is the soul of wit, you fail.

He is a good example of the ability of the uneducated to secure employment. Being a liberal troll means he can work from home, probably up North somewhere.
Facts elude him, but he doesn't get paid to utilize facts. Give him facts and he will go away. He can only respond by name calling or diverting to simplicity like the old blame Bush repetition.

We have a great community here in the Villages and I have yet to converse with an opposing view, where they would get offensive and rude as this guy. Obviously, he is getting paid to troll website forums and disrupt conversations. :spoken:

[Guest]

Here's some facts:

Clinton was wrong to have a server in her home that she used for gov work. That, in itself is reason for termination of employment.
Clinton was wrong to destroy gov related information instead of turning it over to the gov for disposition. Also reason for termination of employment.
She already left employment so those are moot points
Clinton was wrong to have ANY classified information on her private server. That is a felony and she should serve time. That won't happen.
Clinton was wrong to destroy classified information improperly. Improper destruction of classified information is wrong and reason for termination, but could also be a violation of law, depending on factors involved.
Clinton was wrong to pass on classified information to persons (lawyers?) on a thumb drive, if those persons are not cleared for that information. Once again, mishandling of classified material is reason for termination and possible felony charges.
Clinton made false statements under oath. Violation of law and reason for prosecution.

Clinton is morally and ethically bankrupt. Reason not to trust her.
Clinton treats folks that work for her like crap. Reason not to like her.
Clinton stayed with her husband after his cheating and lies. Reason not to trust her judgement.
Clinton lied about the bengahzi incident and cause. Reason to dislike her.

[Guest]

To the two people that I referred to in my long unbearable post, I know you didn't respond. Take a good look at the people that did. You see what I am up against. This is my first post, since the long one. I am getting blamed for things I didn't do by the people I mentioned in the post.

Please tell me how this reflects well on the Republican's posting here. The few certainly don't the many here, but maybe the many should tell the few to shut the hell up. There is no reason in the world not to be civil with each other. Being civil isn't a sign of weakness.

[Guest]

To the two people that I referred to in my long unbearable post, I know you didn't respond. Take a good look at the people that did. You see what I am up against. This is my first post, since the long one. I am getting blamed for things I didn't do by the people I mentioned in the post.

Please tell me how this reflects well on the Republican's posting here. The few certainly don't the many here, but maybe the many should tell the few to shut the hell up. There is no reason in the world not to be civil with each other. Being civil isn't a sign of weakness.

If this is the same guy, Joe, that has been upset with everyone but himself, please read your posts and share what percentage of them do not mention RACE or some variation of REPUBLICANS ON HERE. you know how people are registered ? There are at minimum 2 democrats bashing Hillary Clinton on here, and there are those sneaks who enjoy posting on both sides and really getting max out of the guest thing.

Your use of or thinking everything is racial or party oriented, for me, is not something I want to deal with.

[Guest]

To the two people that I referred to in my long unbearable post, I know you didn't respond. Take a good look at the people that did. You see what I am up against. This is my first post, since the long one. I am getting blamed for things I didn't do by the people I mentioned in the post.

Please tell me how this reflects well on the Republican's posting here. The few certainly don't the many here, but maybe the many should tell the few to shut the hell up. There is no reason in the world not to be civil with each other. Being civil isn't a sign of weakness.

:cryin2:

[Guest]

You may not like this op ed but it is worthy of a read no matter what side of the aisle you are on...

"With all the media focus on Donald Trump’s antics and the anxiety over the upcoming Republican primary debate, the mainstream media are mostly ignoring the surreal drift of the Democratic Party and Hillary Clinton’s troubles. Despite the fact that the Democrats seem to be escaping harsh media scrutiny, this is no easy time for them. In fact, to be considered as a leader who is in sync with the Democratic faithful and the disconnected yet growing left-wing base of the party, you have to put yourself through ideological, intellectual and moral contortions. To be seen as a good Democrat, you have to ignore a lot. You have to pretend a lot."

Most importantly, consider each of these points....

"And in politics, when the facts are bad enough, you don’t have to embellish your opponent’s problems. Today, it is the truth that Democratic candidates and activists have to:

Avoid saying “All lives matter.” Incredibly, that phrase has become controversial.

Pretend that a video of a Planned Parenthood executive swilling wine and stuffing her mouth with salad while nonchalantly talking about how to properly kill an unborn baby in order to harvest its body parts is no big deal.

Pretend that President Obama going to a prison and kibitzing with prisoners is a good use of his time and good imagery. (But if he were to visit a police department to deliver a morale boost, it would rile Democrats everywhere.)

Herald the agreement with Iran as “historic,” enforceable and good for Israel and other U.S. allies.

Fake enthusiasm for Clinton’s presidential campaign, as well as either ignore that she is starting to trail in swing states and that her favorability ratings are dropping or just pretend those aren’t bad omens.

Pretend Clinton appears sincere, effective and honest whenever you see her on TV.

Pretend that it’s okay to shut down part of a Fifth Avenue luxury department store for a $600 haircut while surrounded by a huge entourage, and that it doesn’t take a toll on Clinton’s image.

Act like it is reasonable for Clinton to have a non-position on the Democrats’ threshold issue of the Keystone XL pipeline.

I could go on, but you get my point."



The Insiders: Democrats can (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2015/07/31/the-insiders-democrats-cant-pretend-forever/)

Many, both Republican and Democrat have wondered what has happened to this once great party.

OH, there will be times of good news for democrats...certainly many will try to push their beliefs, whatever they are any more, but watch out...

"Vice President Joe Biden has been holding meetings at his Washington home to discuss challenging Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination, The New York Times reported on Saturday.

Read more: Joe Biden is reportedly considering challenging Hillary - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-is-reportedly-considering-challenging-hillary-2015-8#ixzz3hb224w7h)

[Guest]

Hillary Clinton might as well throw in the towel right now and avoid any more embarrassment for herself and others. We all knew from the very beginning that being president is a man's job. Women need not apply.

[Guest]

Idiots of the world united join the Republican wing nut crowd in the Villages. The Villages is the gathering place for Republicans that absolutely think they can do no wrong despite all evidence to the contrary. You will be required to check your brain in at the door. Don't worry! Brains here are not required, and are frowned upon. Name calling is an asset that keeps on giving.

[Guest]

"Pretend that President Obama going to a prison and kibitzing with prisoners is a good use of his time and good imagery. (But if he were to visit a police department to deliver a morale boost, it would rile Democrats everywhere.)"

At the prison, Obama was protected from the prisoners by bars. At the police station, COPs have guns, and you how he feels about guns. Not saying he would be in danger, but maybe someone would recognize him from an old wanted poster from his college drug dazed days. :laugh::icon_wink:

[Guest]

Idiots of the world united join the Republican wing nut crowd in the Villages. The Villages is the gathering place for Republicans that absolutely think they can do no wrong despite all evidence to the contrary. You will be required to check your brain in at the door. Don't worry! Brains here are not required, and are frowned upon. Name calling is an asset that keeps on giving.

Gee....just re read most of the posts and did not see any "name calling". I DID however see op eds from both liberal and conservative writers on this subject of Hillary.

I did see someone bragging on Hillary filing taxes, being healthy, and releasing a few emails, which is basically all the positives.

I have no idea if she is guilty of all the various accusations (by the way have you seen her top assistant is now being investigated by the feds for money things).

What I know is this...NEVER EVER saw any candidate just entering the primary season with so many possible "indictments" or investigations hanging over their head.

The Democratic party would be better served with another candidate but you and I both know that is not going to happen.

Look, if the folks in the Villages are wing nuts then the entire media world is also in that category. She gobbles up the press for all the things around her and not about what she is trying to pass off as she stands for,

If the comments on here are part of that "right wing conspiracy" that she is always talking about, then she better look at normal and usual supporters of the Democratic party, like the NY Times and such because they are the ones who are reporting and it is reflected here. So, cast your aspersions and call names of people in a much wider....MUCH WIDER AREA than the Villages.

[Guest]

BY THE WAY....ON this very forum, here in the "right wing nut job" area, there was much made about the money made by Mitt Romney....I refer to some pretty mean comments on his income and I checked today.....the Clintons maybe fell a bit short but not by much and now are exceeding him.

I suppose that income that mattered so much in 2012 does not mean as much now.

[Guest]

Gee....just re read most of the posts and did not see any "name calling". I DID however see op eds from both liberal and conservative writers on this subject of Hillary.

I did see someone bragging on Hillary filing taxes, being healthy, and releasing a few emails, which is basically all the positives.

I have no idea if she is guilty of all the various accusations (by the way have you seen her top assistant is now being investigated by the feds for money things).

What I know is this...NEVER EVER saw any candidate just entering the primary season with so many possible "indictments" or investigations hanging over their head.

The Democratic party would be better served with another candidate but you and I both know that is not going to happen.

Look, if the folks in the Villages are wing nuts then the entire media world is also in that category. She gobbles up the press for all the things around her and not about what she is trying to pass off as she stands for,

If the comments on here are part of that "right wing conspiracy" that she is always talking about, then she better look at normal and usual supporters of the Democratic party, like the NY Times and such because they are the ones who are reporting and it is reflected here. So, cast your aspersions and call names of people in a much wider....MUCH WIDER AREA than the Villages.

Aw, he's probably just jealous that he can't live here. If we are "wing nuts" at least we are happy "wing nuts." He doesn't seem to be very happy.

[Guest]

BY THE WAY....ON this very forum, here in the "right wing nut job" area, there was much made about the money made by Mitt Romney....I refer to some pretty mean comments on his income and I checked today.....the Clintons maybe fell a bit short but not by much and now are exceeding him.

I suppose that income that mattered so much in 2012 does not mean as much now.

Naw, the Clintons are dirt poor. Remember when Billy boy was interviewed and asked if he was going to stop taking those high paying speaking jobs and he said, "heck no, we gotta pay our bills." Billary told everyone that they were dirt poor, poverty level when they left the White House. .Probably why they stole the silverware and china on the way out the door. Hey folks, the bad guy is the good guy, only on TV fantasy. In real life the bad guy is the bad guy, not an actor.

By the way, did the Clintons ever get that 25 million dollars that they forgot to declare resolved yet? We all know how easy it is to lose 25 million don't we? Kind of like forgetting that she was taking home classified information. But, Queen Hillary promises us that all this is just GOP conspiracy.

[Guest]

Naw, the Clintons are dirt poor. Remember when Billy boy was interviewed and asked if he was going to stop taking those high paying speaking jobs and he said, "heck no, we gotta pay our bills." Billary told everyone that they were dirt poor, poverty level when they left the White House. .Probably why they stole the silverware and china on the way out the door. Hey folks, the bad guy is the good guy, only on TV fantasy. In real life the bad guy is the bad guy, not an actor.

By the way, did the Clintons ever get that 25 million dollars that they forgot to declare resolved yet? We all know how easy it is to lose 25 million don't we? Kind of like forgetting that she was taking home classified information. But, Queen Hillary promises us that all this is just GOP conspiracy.

YOU are obviously a member of a right wing conspiracy and just another right wing nut job.

I do understand why folks say that stuff. If you didn't know it was true, you would look at all the things hanging over this woman's head and say that it was impossible, and that it had to be made up.

Nobody asked the right wing nut jobs in the Villages for any links or backup on this stuff. IT IS the news !!

But we are still racist in addition to nut jobs. Our close association with Planned Parenthood and our glee in aborting black babies makes us so. And the posts from that JOHN from TOPIX who reports on posters here was not racist, simply misunderstood.

[Guest]

Naw, the Clintons are dirt poor. Remember when Billy boy was interviewed and asked if he was going to stop taking those high paying speaking jobs and he said, "heck no, we gotta pay our bills." Billary told everyone that they were dirt poor, poverty level when they left the White House. .Probably why they stole the silverware and china on the way out the door. Hey folks, the bad guy is the good guy, only on TV fantasy. In real life the bad guy is the bad guy, not an actor.

By the way, did the Clintons ever get that 25 million dollars that they forgot to declare resolved yet? We all know how easy it is to lose 25 million don't we? Kind of like forgetting that she was taking home classified information. But, Queen Hillary promises us that all this is just GOP conspiracy.

This 25 million ???

"The Clinton Foundation reported Thursday that it has received as much as $26.4 million in previously undisclosed payments from major corporations, universities, foreign sources and other groups.

The disclosure came as the foundation faced questions over whether it fully complied with a 2008 ethics agreement to reveal its donors and whether any of its funding sources present conflicts of interest for Hillary Rodham Clinton as she begins her presidential campaign."

Clinton Foundation reveals up to $26 million in additional payments - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/clinton-foundation-reveals-up-to-26million-in-additional-payments/2015/05/21/e49da740-0009-11e5-833c-a2de05b6b2a4_story.html)

[Guest]

I told you to control the fools, but you didn't. The second, that I respond in kind, you joined the fools. Now, you are going to get a full dose our your own medicine. I am not mad. I am going to start having what people around here consider fun.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

This poster must be cut off period.

Nobody posts like this on TOTV.

Hoping using means this person is identified and thrown, and really hope this person does not live in The Villages.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

This sure points out the liberal way on here. True colors.

Conservatives can get aggressive, but this is typical of the liberal postings.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

Get this degenerate's IP and boot him.

[Guest]

What you don't like it, when your tactics are used against you? By all means, have the administrator email me. I will sit down in person with the administrator, and go over from day 1 all my posts, and the responses I received to them. If they are honest, which we know they are, more than a few Republican posters here will have to explain their behavior.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

This person needs to be banned from TOTV. Please ADMIN - do so and make a point that obscene exchanges such as this will not be tolerated.

[Guest]

What you don't like it, when your tactics are used against you? By all means, have the administrator email me. I will sit down in person with the administrator, and go over from day 1 all my posts, and the responses I received to them. If they are honest, which we know they are, more than a few Republican posters here will have to explain their behavior.

If you are the poster who posted the obscenity, then you are out of line saying that others use those tactics. I have never seen anything like that on this forum or anywhere on TOTV. I hope the ADMIN decides to keep this forum classy and bans this sort of behavior - PERIOD!

[Guest]

You haven't walked a foot in my shoes. If you haven't seen the behavior that has been directed at me, you haven't been looking. How do I contact the administers on Talk of the Villages? I've looked , but I can't find their email address. I will be more than happy to sit down with them, and go over every post that I have made in this thread, as well as other threads. Let them be the judge of who is calling who what.

Have I engaged in name calling! You are damn right I have. They are posts 81, 89, 90, and 94. I have also made note of all my other posts on this thread, and what responses I received. Do you really want to see, who is being honest, and who isn't?

[Guest]

This person needs to be banned from TOTV. Please ADMIN - do so and make a point that obscene exchanges such as this will not be tolerated.

I 100% agree. Admin we all opted in know what we were letting ourselves in for and accepted and tolerate some posts we wish were not here....but we know how to handle most of the aggravation.

This the poster is testing to see just how far he/she can go and still get away with it.

We did not opt in the have pornographic insults added to the sometimes word abuse that we can tolerate.

I suggest you show this person there is a limit and they have definitely crossed the line.

I for one will not remain on the political forum if this is not put to a stop.
Please advise us.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

Admin....my post above is about this one #90.

I would like to know what will done about this crossing of the line of decency in a public forum.

[Guest]

Boy, did I make a mistake! The right wing nuts actually like being called wing nuts. It is a sense of pride. It show that someone actually is paying attention to them. Pulling down their pants in public and showing their fully aroused one inch dick didn't work. Being told what they actually are works like a charm. Now, they are happy beyond their wildest imaginations. There is a God in heaven.

The graphic language in this post is unacceptable on any level on a forum such as this.

Perhaps this is ok on that other board where people go to use obscenities or in a barroom, but no matter your political leanings, the use of this kind of language cannot be tolerated.

Disagreeing with vigor is one thing.....the use of obscene imagery and this kind of language cannot be tolerated.

[Guest]

You haven't walked a foot in my shoes. If you haven't seen the behavior that has been directed at me, you haven't been looking. How do I contact the administers on Talk of the Villages? I've looked , but I can't find their email address. I will be more than happy to sit down with them, and go over every post that I have made in this thread, as well as other threads. Let them be the judge of who is calling who what.

Have I engaged in name calling! You are damn right I have. They are posts 81, 89, 90, and 94. I have also made note of all my other posts on this thread, and what responses I received. Do you really want to see, who is being honest, and who isn't?

:cryin2::cryin2::cryin2::rant-rave::rant-rave::blahblahblah::blahblahblah:

[Guest]

What you don't like it, when your tactics are used against you? By all means, have the administrator email me. I will sit down in person with the administrator, and go over from day 1 all my posts, and the responses I received to them. If they are honest, which we know they are, more than a few Republican posters here will have to explain their behavior.

Admin does not need to "email" you or "sit down" with you. Admin has the right to boot anyone they wish, for any reason they wish. Taking a couple of angry hits is one thing, but to be downright disgusting is not conducive to TV. You have embarrassed yourself. You should slink away quietly.

[Guest]

We can all agree that one liberal poster went way over the line with his crude comment. However, let's get back on topic.

I am anxious to see the top 10 candidates "debate" on Thursday. With so many candidates, it will be almost impossible to get real feel of what they stand for. If the time is equally divided, they will only get about 7 minutes of talk time. How will the moderator cut one off (Trump) when he will just over talk the others?

Pundits will be working overtime for a few weeks afterward to try and find a gaffe one might make. Depending on the candidate, it will be blown out of proportion. It might just be a stammer on a word but still will be blown out of proportion.

Anyhow, looking forward to the spirited exchange that will be upcoming both on the debate and, afterward, here on the forum. Go Rubio!

[Guest]

We can all agree that one liberal poster went way over the line with his crude comment. However, let's get back on topic.

I am anxious to see the top 10 candidates "debate" on Thursday. With so many candidates, it will be almost impossible to get real feel of what they stand for. If the time is equally divided, they will only get about 7 minutes of talk time. How will the moderator cut one off (Trump) when he will just over talk the others?

Pundits will be working overtime for a few weeks afterward to try and find a gaffe one might make. Depending on the candidate, it will be blown out of proportion. It might just be a stammer on a word but still will be blown out of proportion.

Anyhow, looking forward to the spirited exchange that will be upcoming both on the debate and, afterward, here on the forum. Go Rubio!

Even though getting back on topic is not about the upcoming debate, I think that a lot of viewers will be tuning in to watch the Donald Trump Show.

[Guest]

We can all agree that one liberal poster went way over the line with his crude comment. However, let's get back on topic.

I am anxious to see the top 10 candidates "debate" on Thursday. With so many candidates, it will be almost impossible to get real feel of what they stand for. If the time is equally divided, they will only get about 7 minutes of talk time. How will the moderator cut one off (Trump) when he will just over talk the others?

Pundits will be working overtime for a few weeks afterward to try and find a gaffe one might make. Depending on the candidate, it will be blown out of proportion. It might just be a stammer on a word but still will be blown out of proportion.

Anyhow, looking forward to the spirited exchange that will be upcoming both on the debate and, afterward, here on the forum. Go Rubio!


I agree AND disagree with your post.

That poster, whether liberal, conservative or whatever he is needs to be traced and booted off this forum. He completely overstepped any boundary and needs to be gone. I DO NOt think it should be forgotten and that we continue on as if we were not,whatever party or political side, insulted by this poster.

On the agreeable side,I also look forward to the debates. We have not reached a point where anything of substance will be said, and I fear they will all over stretch to get attention, but will be watching.

On the othe

[Guest]

Even though getting back on topic is not about the upcoming debate, I think that a lot of viewers will be tuning in to watch the Donald Trump Show.

First, the debate will be interesting but certainly without substance for sure.

But back on topic,......

"She has received her worst favorability rating ever. She has lost ground on Republicans' three strongest candidates. And she is perceived to be about as honest and trustworthy as Donald Trump."

Those are some of the troubling numbers for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a new poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University.


Read more: Hillary Clinton poll: Bad general election news - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-poll-trump-2015-7#ixzz3hfN7dYwj)

And of course.....

"Hillary Clinton’s recent speech in which she decried “quarterly capitalism” has predictably generated a great deal of commentary. With good reason.

Not only is “quarterly capitalism” a myth of the highest order, Clinton’s solution to what is not a problem would bring great harm to the economy. Missed by Clinton is the basic economic truism learned the hard way by European countries that you can’t hire people easily if you can’t easily fire them. As readers will soon see, the hiring analogy is apt."


Memo To Hillary Clinton: You Can't Hire People If You Can't Fire Them - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2015/08/02/memo-to-hillary-clinton-you-cant-hire-people-if-you-cant-fire-them/)

[Guest]

First, the debate will be interesting but certainly without substance for sure.

But back on topic,......

"She has received her worst favorability rating ever. She has lost ground on Republicans' three strongest candidates. And she is perceived to be about as honest and trustworthy as Donald Trump."

Those are some of the troubling numbers for former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in a new poll released Thursday by Quinnipiac University.


Read more: Hillary Clinton poll: Bad general election news - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-poll-trump-2015-7#ixzz3hfN7dYwj)

And of course.....

"Hillary Clinton’s recent speech in which she decried “quarterly capitalism” has predictably generated a great deal of commentary. With good reason.

Not only is “quarterly capitalism” a myth of the highest order, Clinton’s solution to what is not a problem would bring great harm to the economy. Missed by Clinton is the basic economic truism learned the hard way by European countries that you can’t hire people easily if you can’t easily fire them. As readers will soon see, the hiring analogy is apt."


Memo To Hillary Clinton: You Can't Hire People If You Can't Fire Them - Forbes (http://www.forbes.com/sites/johntamny/2015/08/02/memo-to-hillary-clinton-you-cant-hire-people-if-you-cant-fire-them/)

Good post :thumbup::thumbup:

[Guest]

I believe that it is premature to count the polls regarding the general election, especially before any debates. Once we have debates, then the point spread will be greater, separating the GOP contenders. By that time, I am pretty sure that Clinton's popularity will have fallen substantially. Biden's poll numbers are already competitive with Clinton's so we don't yet know where this is going. Hilary seems to assume she already has the nomination and won the election. Her arrogance may be her undoing. I don't even think Sanders is going to be a factor in the primary IF Biden throws his hat in.
I still think that any of the GOP candidates could beat Hillary if she gets the nomination. I really think that Biden would be harder to beat, as ridiculous as that sounds right now. Personally, out of all the possibles, if any Democrat has to win the general election I would rather it be Biden than Hillary or Bernie. At least Biden has a reputation from congress at working across the aisle. Democrat party leaders may very well get to the point where they feel that Hillary is a liability and dump her. It will be a hard decision because she is female and they really would like to exploit that angle. Hillary really has a lot of bailing to do to keep her ship afloat. Wonder why she is waiting so long. Maybe she knows that she doesn't have any answers to the questions that the media wants to ask. Or, she is hoping that she can keep the evidence of her criminal activity hidden.

[Guest]

I believe that it is premature to count the polls regarding the general election, especially before any debates. Once we have debates, then the point spread will be greater, separating the GOP contenders. By that time, I am pretty sure that Clinton's popularity will have fallen substantially. Biden's poll numbers are already competitive with Clinton's so we don't yet know where this is going. Hilary seems to assume she already has the nomination and won the election. Her arrogance may be her undoing. I don't even think Sanders is going to be a factor in the primary IF Biden throws his hat in.
I still think that any of the GOP candidates could beat Hillary if she gets the nomination. I really think that Biden would be harder to beat, as ridiculous as that sounds right now. Personally, out of all the possibles, if any Democrat has to win the general election I would rather it be Biden than Hillary or Bernie. At least Biden has a reputation from congress at working across the aisle. Democrat party leaders may very well get to the point where they feel that Hillary is a liability and dump her. It will be a hard decision because she is female and they really would like to exploit that angle. Hillary really has a lot of bailing to do to keep her ship afloat. Wonder why she is waiting so long. Maybe she knows that she doesn't have any answers to the questions that the media wants to ask. Or, she is hoping that she can keep the evidence of her criminal activity hidden.

Not a good post.....A GREAT, WELL THOUGHT OUT, POST, and in my opinion accurate assessment

[Guest]

I believe that it is premature to count the polls regarding the general election, especially before any debates. Once we have debates, then the point spread will be greater, separating the GOP contenders. By that time, I am pretty sure that Clinton's popularity will have fallen substantially. Biden's poll numbers are already competitive with Clinton's so we don't yet know where this is going. Hilary seems to assume she already has the nomination and won the election. Her arrogance may be her undoing. I don't even think Sanders is going to be a factor in the primary IF Biden throws his hat in.
I still think that any of the GOP candidates could beat Hillary if she gets the nomination. I really think that Biden would be harder to beat, as ridiculous as that sounds right now. Personally, out of all the possibles, if any Democrat has to win the general election I would rather it be Biden than Hillary or Bernie. At least Biden has a reputation from congress at working across the aisle. Democrat party leaders may very well get to the point where they feel that Hillary is a liability and dump her. It will be a hard decision because she is female and they really would like to exploit that angle. Hillary really has a lot of bailing to do to keep her ship afloat. Wonder why she is waiting so long. Maybe she knows that she doesn't have any answers to the questions that the media wants to ask. Or, she is hoping that she can keep the evidence of her criminal activity hidden.

That's a big negatory, good buddy. At this point in time, way too early, Sec. Clinton would win against any Republican candidate.

Look at the Democrat demographics vs the Republican demographics and you will see it is a win for Democrats. The Republicans are to divided against themselves and also against the demographic of the Democrats. Like it or not, those Hispanics, blacks, other minorities, poor people, legal immigrants, young people, and women do count a lot. Pandering to them by Democrats creates a win for Democrats. Voting against their programs by Republicans creates more animosity toward Republicans by those demographic groups and thus almost guarantees a Democrat win for 2012 presidency - no matter who the Democrat nominee is.

[Guest]

That's a big negatory, good buddy. At this point in time, way too early, Sec. Clinton would win against any Republican candidate.

Look at the Democrat demographics vs the Republican demographics and you will see it is a win for Democrats. The Republicans are to divided against themselves and also against the demographic of the Democrats. Like it or not, those Hispanics, blacks, other minorities, poor people, legal immigrants, young people, and women do count a lot. Pandering to them by Democrats creates a win for Democrats. Voting against their programs by Republicans creates more animosity toward Republicans by those demographic groups and thus almost guarantees a Democrat win for 2012 presidency - no matter who the Democrat nominee is.

Sadly some good points.

Sigh as I say those magic words this poster used and used accurately....

PANDERING

Sad to see that the good of the country comes AFTER THE POLITICS.

Big sigh again...so sad

[Guest]

That's a big negatory, good buddy. At this point in time, way too early, Sec. Clinton would win against any Republican candidate.

Look at the Democrat demographics vs the Republican demographics and you will see it is a win for Democrats. The Republicans are to divided against themselves and also against the demographic of the Democrats. Like it or not, those Hispanics, blacks, other minorities, poor people, legal immigrants, young people, and women do count a lot. Pandering to them by Democrats creates a win for Democrats. Voting against their programs by Republicans creates more animosity toward Republicans by those demographic groups and thus almost guarantees a Democrat win for 2012 presidency - no matter who the Democrat nominee is.


Assuming you meant to say 2016, although the exact same thing could have been said in 2012. When your opponents are imploding, step out of their way.

[Guest]

Actually, you are mistaken. If the election was today (and it isn't) then ALL the Republicans would be voting for a single Republican candidate. And two important parts that you are not considering is that there will be a minute black turn out compared to what Obama drew. Second is, that you forget that she would not get the Independent vote she needs to win today. I also believe that Hillary would not get as many female voters to turn out for HER as she might have gotten a year or two or three ago. It seems that the closer we get to the elections, the less support she is getting. Her favorability is fading, fading, fading. It seems that you are already giving her the election, just as she arrogantly assumes that she has it in the bag. A lot of factors can change. Biden might enter the race. She might go to jail (not likely).

Predicting Hillary's win this early is way too premature. I will predict that in about two weeks, it will be predicted that she would ether tie or lose to one of the Republicans. Then her party leaders will do a reassessment and consider dropping her for another Democrat, possibly Biden. And that won't bother me at all. Not that I would welcome his winning the election, but he would be better than what we have in there now and much better than Hillary.

[Guest]

Actually, you are mistaken. If the election was today (and it isn't) then ALL the Republicans would be voting for a single Republican candidate. And two important parts that you are not considering is that there will be a minute black turn out compared to what Obama drew. Second is, that you forget that she would not get the Independent vote she needs to win today. I also believe that Hillary would not get as many female voters to turn out for HER as she might have gotten a year or two or three ago. It seems that the closer we get to the elections, the less support she is getting. Her favorability is fading, fading, fading. It seems that you are already giving her the election, just as she arrogantly assumes that she has it in the bag. A lot of factors can change. Biden might enter the race. She might go to jail (not likely).

Predicting Hillary's win this early is way too premature. I will predict that in about two weeks, it will be predicted that she would ether tie or lose to one of the Republicans. Then her party leaders will do a reassessment and consider dropping her for another Democrat, possibly Biden. And that woun't bother me at all. Not that I would welcome his winning the election, but he would be better than what we have in there now and much better than Hillary.

If you go back to my post, I was speaking of the demographics of both parties. The black vote has seen the unfavorable writings and actions taken to them by Republicans in Congress. They will turn out for a Democrat nominee. Same for the poor people, the legal immigrants, young voters, and a high percentage of women voters. These go Democrat. Not necessarily talking Hillary but Democrat!

These demographics do not want their government free stuff to stop. They will vote en masse and they vote Democrat. Be it Clinton, Sanders, Biden, or whomever the Democrat nominee is: they win.

[Guest]

I am still here. I read the guidelines before I started posting. "No personal attacks." "conduct unbecoming a TOTV poster".

Let's see. I been called a racist numerous times. I have also been called a troll, moron, idiot, cry baby, and I am sure many other names. Do you actually know what "no personal attacks" means? You probably do, but don't think that it applies to you.

I have no problem at all going to administrators of the board, and showing them exactly what I did, and WHY. I will go over with them the history of my posts, and what the responses were from other posters here. I asked what appeared to be two reasonable Republican posters, and asked them to put a lid on name callers, that add nothing to this forum. There wasn't a peep from these two.

As far as the name callers are concerned, you got what was coming to you. If the administrators are honest, and suspend me for my behavior, they will have to suspend 95% of the Republicans here for the same behavior. The easiest person in the world to fool is yourself. Denying what you did wasn't the cause of the backlash is fooling yourself into believing that you have done nothing wrong.

Do what you do best ignore this post, because it hits directly at home.

[Guest]

I am still here. I read the guidelines before I started posting. "No personal attacks." "conduct unbecoming a TOTV poster".

Let's see. I been called a racist numerous times. I have also been called a troll, moron, idiot, cry baby, and I am sure many other names. Do you actually know what "no personal attacks" means? You probably do, but don't think that it applies to you.

I have no problem at all going to administrators of the board, and showing them exactly what I did, and WHY. I will go over with them the history of my posts, and what the responses were from other posters here. I asked what appeared to be two reasonable Republican posters, and asked them to put a lid on name callers, that add nothing to this forum. There wasn't a peep from these two.

As far as the name callers are concerned, you got what was coming to you. If the administrators are honest, and suspend me for my behavior, they will have to suspend 95% of the Republicans here for the same behavior. The easiest person in the world to fool is yourself. Denying what you did wasn't the cause of the backlash is fooling yourself into believing that you have done nothing wrong.

Do what you do best ignore this post, because it hits directly at home.

If you are iwning up to the pornographic iteration in an earlier post....you are working way too hard to justify what is just out and out wrong in a public forum.

We all understand why some have to do real name calling and making crude remarks about the person, their background, party, religion or anything else some of you spew all over. We tolerate/ignore that.

Bto stoop so low as to use the type language you did in that post is just plain crude behavior. If the administrations does not take such behavior to task then I will be shocked.

This is not what we opted in for and save the BS about getting what we get when we opt in. You know damn well you crossed the line and should man up and volunteer to get off the forum for unwarranted behavior.

[Guest]

Here is a partial list of what we (the collective we) are called regularly on this forum. I may have just scratched the surface and maybe it can be expanded on the Just For Fun section

Ignorant troll socialist libtard teabag idiot lunatic wingnut moron racist sexist stupid regressive .........

Perhaps a Communication 101 class is needed. Intelligent posts get dumbed down by this rhetoric and rendered ineffectual. What happens then is standards are lowered to the point that shock value is all that's left.

[Guest]

Here is a partial list of what we (the collective we) are called regularly on this forum. I may have just scratched the surface and maybe it can be expanded on the Just For Fun section

Ignorant troll socialist libtard teabag idiot lunatic wingnut moron racist sexist stupid regressive .........

Perhaps a Communication 101 class is needed. Intelligent posts get dumbed down by this rhetoric and rendered ineffectual. What happens then is standards are lowered to the point that shock value is all that's left.

And of course you and whomever WE is that you refer to always post with links, facts to support your case etc.

And since yours is one whose name always show for a bit, let me tell you something. I know for a fact that the GUEST function has allowed "cover" for many left leaning folks to post their true feelings without the PM criticism, etc (not referring to you specifically, but think you might understands)

Of course both sides do it. I have been a racist, bigot, neo whatever, Tea ******, retard, nut job, etc and those are just aimed at me. In addition, most conservatives are really ripped on your (again using the collective as you did with WE) alternate site of Topix. Some names on there cannot, or should not be repeated.

This thread had some responsible posts, and then you and maybe a few others started with a series of simply name calling without even an attempt at discussion.

I share your concern with the name calling, but PLEASE SPARE me the "poor me" thing...it makes you look very silly. You KNOW for sure some who do it routinely thus your innocence and hurt feelings do not register. Fact is I have seen you simply jump on with a few little one liners. If I sound a bit peeved at your holier than thou post that is why....I know you do it.

[Guest]

And of course you and whomever WE is that you refer to always post with links, facts to support your case etc.

And since yours is one whose name always show for a bit, let me tell you something. I know for a fact that the GUEST function has allowed "cover" for many left leaning folks to post their true feelings without the PM criticism, etc (not referring to you specifically, but think you might understands)

Of course both sides do it. I have been a racist, bigot, neo whatever, Tea ******, retard, nut job, etc and those are just aimed at me. In addition, most conservatives are really ripped on your (again using the collective as you did with WE) alternate site of Topix. Some names on there cannot, or should not be repeated.

This thread had some responsible posts, and then you and maybe a few others started with a series of simply name calling without even an attempt at discussion.

I share your concern with the name calling, but PLEASE SPARE me the "poor me" thing...it makes you look very silly. You KNOW for sure some who do it routinely thus your innocence and hurt feelings do not register. Fact is I have seen you simply jump on with a few little one liners. If I sound a bit peeved at your holier than thou post that is why....I know you do it.

It was hardly a "poor me" post. Just pontificating. Never been on Topix or know anything about it so your reference should have been the collective our. And I know that my name shows up but who cares? If I go to my Galaxy Note 4 running Lollipop 5.0.1 poster's names show up under my notifications screen. The Guest thing only works selectively. Once again, who cares? Some of the most adamant posters here are much more polite and contributory on the other side.

[Guest]

Post# 118 - I totally agree with most of the things that you said. The "poor me" doesn't apply. That seems to imply that I feel sorry for myself, which I don't. As far as silly is concerned, it would be silly to expect some people will ever change here. I guess, name calling is to divert attention away from a post that makes sense, but doesn't fit your way of thinking. You can't be wrong; therefore, the other person is a moron or in my world a right wing nut(lol).

As for obscenity, I didn't use any language that would get bleeped out on TV. There are obviously children on TV, which would probably laugh at the things I posted. Adults here are so thinned skinned that making a joke about the size of their canole offends them. That's funny.

I grew up in a racially balanced working class neighborhood. It was half Irish, and half Italian. Making fun of each other's nationality was a way of life from the age of 5 years on. Why would I get offended at the name calling?

I am a little upset at you, because you took the words right out of my mouth. "holier that thou". You can't even imagine how many times I almost threw that out there.

One liners! When in Rome do like the Romans.

So, there is no confusion here are my posts on this thread 13, 14, 22, 34, 37, 41, 44, 50, 57, 71 and 76. The ones that are out of line are 81, 89, 90, and 94. I made several after that starting with asking for the administrator's email address. I'll get the number, after I post this. If I go back, I am afraid I will have to type this post over again.

[Guest]

The other two posts are 97, and 115.

[Guest]

Again, I have to recommend you watch the movie Bulworth, especially on cable. Bulworth is a Democratic senator from California running for reelection in 1998. He gets in with the black crowd, and picks up their frequent use of obscenities.

He is being interviewed on nationwide TV, and the host asks him, "Why the change in language? Why the use of obscenities?" Bulworth's singing response is "Obscenities! Obscenities! The real obscenity is believing a mother bleepin word the Democrats, and Republicans have to say!"

Given the makeup of this crowd, I think you will like Hollywood's attack primarily on the Democratic party in the Clinton years. Everything in this movie still applies today.

[Guest]

Actually, you are mistaken. If the election was today (and it isn't) then ALL the Republicans would be voting for a single Republican candidate. And two important parts that you are not considering is that there will be a minute black turn out compared to what Obama drew. Second is, that you forget that she would not get the Independent vote she needs to win today. I also believe that Hillary would not get as many female voters to turn out for HER as she might have gotten a year or two or three ago. It seems that the closer we get to the elections, the less support she is getting. Her favorability is fading, fading, fading. It seems that you are already giving her the election, just as she arrogantly assumes that she has it in the bag. A lot of factors can change. Biden might enter the race. She might go to jail (not likely).

Predicting Hillary's win this early is way too premature. I will predict that in about two weeks, it will be predicted that she would ether tie or lose to one of the Republicans. Then her party leaders will do a reassessment and consider dropping her for another Democrat, possibly Biden. And that won't bother me at all. Not that I would welcome his winning the election, but he would be better than what we have in there now and much better than Hillary.


Yeah, Hillary is only polling at 80% among democrats. She must be shaking in her shoes. Sadly for Joe Biden, Hillary has already lined up most of the big democratic donors and politicos. Everybody loves Joe, but it's surprising to hear republicans heap praise on him after bashing him for seven years.

Will clip, print and save your post to read back to you in two weeks to see if your prediction came true.

[Guest]

Yeah, Hillary is only polling at 80% among democrats. She must be shaking in her shoes. Sadly for Joe Biden, Hillary has already lined up most of the big democratic donors and politicos. Everybody loves Joe, but it's surprising to hear republicans heap praise on him after bashing him for seven years.

Will clip, print and save your post to read back to you in two weeks to see if your prediction came true.

Actually, if you are interested in facts, she has a solid 55% among Democrats and not 80 as you say with absolutely no link or any validation....just words !

"Despite her struggles in general election match-ups, Clinton’s position as a front-runner for the Democratic nomination remains solid with 55 percent of Democrats supporting her—roughly unchanged from a year ago. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ gains, meanwhile, have slowed. The May poll found the avowed socialist’s support spiking from 8% to 15% from a month before; this month he has the backing of 17% of Democrats


Hillary Clinton Polling Numbers Down In New National Election Survey (http://time.com/3977941/hillary-clinton-poll-trump/)

"The poll still shows her with a commanding lead in the Democratic race, as she leads with 55% of the Democratic vote nationwide.

Read more: Hillary Clinton poll: Bad general election news - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-poll-trump-2015-7#ixzz3hhakX1FX)


But that is ok....what is 25 points !!

[Guest]

The election is over a year away. Bush, and Walker have pretty much escaped the heat of the press with all the attention Trump has been receiving. As soon as their records come into view, they will both slip. The one thing that you can expect from the press they hardly ever write anything good about the candidate of the opposite party. If there is a neutral press out there, it is very well hidden.

The Republicans are going to overplay their hand with Benghazi. Trey Gowdy comment about a speedy hearing is going to come back to haunt him. Whether you want to hear it or not, the families of the four dead Americans has been lost in politics.

Given the amount of money Hillary has from donors, she will be able to portray herself as the victim of out of control Republican behavior. I am sure she will play the victim very well. The only thing that could hurt her in the quest for victimhood, is her armor piercing voice.

[Guest]

Actually, if you are interested in facts, she has a solid 55% among Democrats and not 80 as you say with absolutely no link or any validation....just words !

"Despite her struggles in general election match-ups, Clinton’s position as a front-runner for the Democratic nomination remains solid with 55 percent of Democrats supporting her—roughly unchanged from a year ago. Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders’ gains, meanwhile, have slowed. The May poll found the avowed socialist’s support spiking from 8% to 15% from a month before; this month he has the backing of 17% of Democrats


Hillary Clinton Polling Numbers Down In New National Election Survey (http://time.com/3977941/hillary-clinton-poll-trump/)

"The poll still shows her with a commanding lead in the Democratic race, as she leads with 55% of the Democratic vote nationwide.

Read more: Hillary Clinton poll: Bad general election news - Business Insider (http://www.businessinsider.com/hillary-clinton-poll-trump-2015-7#ixzz3hhakX1FX)


But that is ok....what is 25 points !!

And she still needs the Independent vote, which doesn't look favorable for her right now. Without the Independent vote, I doubt there is a chance for either party to win.

[Guest]

Again, I have to recommend you watch the movie Bulworth, especially on cable. Bulworth is a Democratic senator from California running for reelection in 1998. He gets in with the black crowd, and picks up their frequent use of obscenities.

He is being interviewed on nationwide TV, and the host asks him, "Why the change in language? Why the use of obscenities?" Bulworth's singing response is "Obscenities! Obscenities! The real obscenity is believing a mother bleepin word the Democrats, and Republicans have to say!"

Given the makeup of this crowd, I think you will like Hollywood's attack primarily on the Democratic party in the Clinton years. Everything in this movie still applies today.

Yes, it is a very funny movie.

[Guest]

Maybe Trump is taking all the heat off the other candidates on purpose. What would happen if he tears down Hillary, takes all the liberal media heat about his background and then when they get close to the elections, he drops out? The other candidates walk in unscathed and unblemished, one of them to win the primary and general election. Trump becomes the party hero. Naw.....but it sounds good.

[Guest]

Interesting news....as you read this if you do, remember when they raided General Petraeus's home for a server...

"A federal judge is ordering the State Department to ask Hillary Clinton to confirm, under penalty of perjury, that she has turned over certain work-related emails kept on a private email server during her Foggy Bottom tenure.

"The Government is HEREBY ORDERED to: (1) identify any and all servers, accounts, hard drives, or other devices currently in the possession or control of the State Department or otherwise that may contain responsive information; (2) request that the above named individuals confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all responsive information that was or is in their possession as a result of their employment at the State Department," U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan wrote Friday, after a status hearing over a lawsuit against the State Department.

Sullivan also ordered the department to seek confirmation from Clinton's aides at the time, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills."

Pretty impressive stuff actually. This, on Wednesday, a judge lambasted a State official for the department's slowness in responding to Associated Press requests for information, saying that certain records could have been processed within days "by the least ambitious bureaucrat."

And they want it now !!!!

Finally an editorial comment....

""Hillary Clinton will now have to answer, under penalty of perjury, to a federal court about the separate email server she and her aides used to avoid accountability to the American people," Fitton said in a statement. "This court action shows that the rule of law and public's right to know will no longer take a back seat to politics. Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration that is covering for her are not above the law."


Judge wants Clinton confirmation on State Department emails - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-wants-clinton-confirmation-on-state-department-emails/)

[Guest]

Interesting news....as you read this if you do, remember when they raided General Petraeus's home for a server...

"A federal judge is ordering the State Department to ask Hillary Clinton to confirm, under penalty of perjury, that she has turned over certain work-related emails kept on a private email server during her Foggy Bottom tenure.

"The Government is HEREBY ORDERED to: (1) identify any and all servers, accounts, hard drives, or other devices currently in the possession or control of the State Department or otherwise that may contain responsive information; (2) request that the above named individuals confirm, under penalty of perjury, that they have produced all responsive information that was or is in their possession as a result of their employment at the State Department," U.S. District Court Judge Emmet Sullivan wrote Friday, after a status hearing over a lawsuit against the State Department.

Sullivan also ordered the department to seek confirmation from Clinton's aides at the time, Huma Abedin and Cheryl Mills."

Pretty impressive stuff actually. This, on Wednesday, a judge lambasted a State official for the department's slowness in responding to Associated Press requests for information, saying that certain records could have been processed within days "by the least ambitious bureaucrat."

And they want it now !!!!

Finally an editorial comment....

""Hillary Clinton will now have to answer, under penalty of perjury, to a federal court about the separate email server she and her aides used to avoid accountability to the American people," Fitton said in a statement. "This court action shows that the rule of law and public's right to know will no longer take a back seat to politics. Hillary Clinton and the Obama administration that is covering for her are not above the law."


Judge wants Clinton confirmation on State Department emails - CBS News (http://www.cbsnews.com/news/judge-wants-clinton-confirmation-on-state-department-emails/)

Can anyone hum the theme to "Hang'em High?"

[Guest]

We shall see what happens if anything other than the usual court/lawyer to lawyer contest of papers happens.

Clinton a trained lawyer, with her counsel (experts?) will use or abuse or hide bevery letter of the law.

I am always amused when the lawyer types say I have not done anything illegal. That does not mean they did not do something wrong.

Clinton and her lawyers know every move the courts or investigators will take. It is nothing more than a chess-like game during the iteration and re-iteration of papers during the process.

Hence I have no confidence she will experience any retribution other than getting knocked out of the race......while we would not see justice done we would at least remove the risk of having an unethical untrustworthy, proven liar and cheat from running for POTUS.

[Guest]

Again, I have to recommend you watch the movie Bulworth, especially on cable. Bulworth is a Democratic senator from California running for reelection in 1998. He gets in with the black crowd, and picks up their frequent use of obscenities.

He is being interviewed on nationwide TV, and the host asks him, "Why the change in language? Why the use of obscenities?" Bulworth's singing response is "Obscenities! Obscenities! The real obscenity is believing a mother bleepin word the Democrats, and Republicans have to say!"

Given the makeup of this crowd, I think you will like Hollywood's attack primarily on the Democratic party in the Clinton years. Everything in this movie still applies today.


Donald Trump is the closest thing we have to a Bulworth character this campaign season. He doesn't give a rat's patootie what he says, and people love him for it.

[Guest]

Donald Trump is the closest thing we have to a Bulworth character this campaign season. He doesn't give a rat's patootie what he says, and people love him for it.

Obama is the closest thing we have to a comedian. He makes me want to cry, but not from laughing. I wonder if he has been contracted to host SNL after he leaves the white house.

[Guest]

Obama is the closest thing we have to a comedian. He makes me want to cry, but not from laughing. I wonder if he has been contracted to host SNL after he leaves the white house.

In Kenya!