Yes, it has been shown once again that the Republicans are running scared of Hillary Clinton.

I heard on Fox News this afternoon that the Republicans are spending over a BILLION dollars in the next few months to "villify" Hillary Clinton. This will be a massive influx of negative tv ads and the ever popular robo-calls.

Yes, this was on Fox News today (Sunday, around 4 pm).

Villify was their wording, not mine.

Gee, you didn't get WHO said it, or in WHAT CONTEXT ?

Could they have been discussing the NY Times article from yesterday..

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/12/us...o-test-it.html

Or perhaps the context was the 25 ADDITIONAL million recently raised through George Soros for the same purpose...

Soros Helps Raise Nearly $25 Million For Hillary Clinton

Or perhaps, and sorry I have no links on this but reports are that Soros is waiting for the Republican candidate to be formulated before his next check that will be for the super packs that do the negative.

Are you really so naive, OR is your intent in implying that only Republicans are raising money for this purpose a bit skewed ?

You have to be that naive to post that

Forty posts and not many specifics about who in the GOP is strong enough to beat Hillary Clinton, in answer to the OP's question.

It seems way too early to tell what may come out between now and the Elections in November 2016.

Right now I would expect Bush vs. Clinton as both seem to have the best name recognition and are trying to pull many into their corners. Trump has a lot of name recognition but he is probably angering many more people than he is convincing to possibly vote for him. Cannot see how he can take back his many ugly expressions of his ideas.

I sure hope that everyone understands how stupid this thread is...1 /1/2 years ahead of an election and a year and 1/4 before a candidate is selected. NOBODY can even get close to responding

I don't think anyone has to do that for her. She does a pretty good job doing that for herself.

Who started the war between the parties? McConnell and the Republicans made it clear from day one their goal was to make Obama a one term president. Sure, that is always the goal of the opposing party. No one has taken it to the level that McConnell, the filibuster king, did. The economy was in a free fall caused by "W", and the Republicans fought everything that Obama was doing to try to recover. There is no excuse for that. I have no problem with "W". He was a well intentioned president, who got taken to the cleaners by his closest advisors, and 9/11.

If you didn't goggle "Fox News hypocrisy", please do. Then, tell me whose hands gets caught in the cookie jar over and over. When you attack him on everything, you are bound to get some things right. When you do, blow it out of proportion, and state that his misrepresentation that you found is representative everything this president does, and will do.

Age bias? I am missing something here. I am over 65. I also stated that the youth of this country are up with the current state of Washington, and not engaged in the news. So, what is the disagreement?

Is the only disagreement that we have about The Five is the Democrat gets a say in the format? So everything else I said rings true. So, The Five is not "fair and balanced". I don't have a problem with what The Five is doing. One Democrat is better than none. I have a real problem with anyone calling Fox News (national) "fair and balanced".

Fox News leans toward the Republican party. Is there a dispute there? The liberal press calls Fox News, the mouth piece of the Republican party. That is over the top. However, Fox News calling themselves "fair and balanced" is also over the top. That statement from Fox News is a downright lie. Repeating a lie over and over doesn't turn it magically into the truth.

Who determines what the level of a scandal is? The real IRS scandal is that the IRS is not allowed to enforce the law concerning political charitable organizations 501(c)06. The law states these organizations are not allowed to preform any political actions. The IRS commissioner wants to enforce the law as written. Congress won't let him.

Concerning Hillary emails concerning Benghazi, she should have let an independent group look into her mails. Then gone over with this group what was personal and what was not. Any dispute should have gone to a neutral person. She should have seen what was coming from the fifth Benghazi congressional hearing. There is no way in hell she should have given all of her emails to Trey Gowdy. She has been running for president forever. Anything and everyone she mailed concerning her run, would have found its way to her Republican opponent. Talk about an unfair advantage, nothing like having your opponents playbook.

Maybe just maybe there is no smoking gun. You can look forever for something that isn't there, but claim that it just well hidden. We will find it even if it takes the next two presidential elections to locate it. This assumes she wins in 2016. Come on John Kasich, please announce. As I stated before, a Republican governor that accepted Medicaid under ACA will get my vote. This is a clear indication that he puts people over party.

I apologize to everyone here for getting off subject. I did discuss the subject, but not at great length.

I did the GOOGLE search you recommended, and I would not even reference any of the links provided. As well I googled LIBERAL NEWS HYPOCRISY and got the same thing; I would never consider using them as links on ANYTHING.

In both searches the results are so far left or right, that who would even read them. MEDIA MATTERS for example was set up EXCLUSIVELY AND ONLY to watch every word on Fox.

You also seem to have trouble with context and as with many, HISTORY.

McConnell comments.......

"The Facts

McConnell made his remarks in an interview that appeared in the National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010 — nearly two years after Obama was elected president. The interview took place on the eve the of the midterm elections. The interview is relatively short, so we will print it in its entirety, with key portions highlighted.

When did McConnell say he wanted to make Obama a

I realize context and actual truth are important to you so thought I might point this out. Would you like quotes from Democrats on the eve of off year elections to balance it all out ?

He did not make that clear from day one as you state.

I forgot to add the summary from that Washington Post piece......

" The Pinocchio Test

There is no doubt that McConnell said he wanted to make Obama a one-term president. But he did not say it at the start of Obama’s term; instead, he made his comments at the midpoint, after Obama had enacted many of his preferred policies.

Perhaps, in Obama’s memory, McConnell was always uncooperative. But that does not give him and other Democrats the license to rearrange the chronology to suit the party’s talking points.

Two Pinocchios

When did McConnell say he wanted to make Obama a

Oh and since you have such an interest in such stuff you may find this interesting....this is from about a year ago but it fits for the entire time

"The U.S. Senate failed to advance another piece of popular bipartisan legislation late Monday, and the reason tells the real story of Washington gridlock in the current Congress. To wit, Harry Reid has essentially shut down the Senate as a place to debate and vote on policy.

The Majority Leader's strategy was once again on display as the Senate failed to get the 60 votes to move a popular energy efficiency bill co-sponsored by New Hampshire Democrat Jeanne Shaheen and Ohio Republican Rob Portman. Mr. Reid blamed the defeat on Republican partisanship. But the impasse really came down to Mr. Reid's blockade against amendments that might prove politically difficult for Democrats.

Harry Reid's Senate Blockade - WSJ

I will assume that you trust CNN, thus I got this from them and it gives a bit of an overview on the IRS situation.........which you glossed over as business as usual

IRS Scandal Fast Facts - CNN.com

I will not post it until some resolve comes from it....however, once again we have lost emails and the gal in charge refuses to testify...nothing to hide here

McConnell made himself look like a jacka$$ saying his only goal was to make Obama a one-term president. Not only did he not accomplish his one and only goal, but Obama went on to win his second election with 51% of the popular vote, making him the only president to win back-to-back elections with over 50% of the popular vote since Eisenhower.

I didn't gloss over anything. Did the IRS target Tea Party groups? When you put the Tea Party target on your chest, someone is going to shoot at it. The IRS thinks that they are answerable to nobody. They don't have a gun in their hands. They have a B52 loaded with smart bombs.

The law concerning 501(c)4 political charitable groups dates back to the early 50's and states that these groups can perform no political advertising/actions. There is another IRS regulation concerning activity by political action groups. In the late 50's, that was changed to no more than 50% political activity. However, the law was never changed. The IRS commissioner wants to enforce the law as written in the early 50's. There is no way that Congress to go back to the law as written. They will changed it to the way it is being enforced now, because it benefits both parties.

It was reported that McConnell had a meeting with other top Republicans prior to Obama accepting the oath of office with the purpose of how to deal with the new president. That's where they agreed to try and make a one term president. I don't know if McConnell or anybody in the Congress or President or his staff could pass the Pinocchio test. I guess you would have to look at the number of items that McConnell filibustered during that period to get an idea who is telling the truth. It is not worth the trouble.

Instead of goggling "Fox News Hypocrisy", try this. Comcast on demand, TV, The Daily Show on June 22nd. Jon Stewart has made a lot of money attacking Fox News, and the Republican party. Don't listen to what he has to say. Look at the Fox News clips that he is showing concerning the 9 deaths in SC, and the 2 policemen in New York City. Fox News reporters stated that Obama was politizing (sp) the 9 deaths in SC even before the victims were put in the ground. However, they did the same thing in the deaths of the two officers attacking both Obama and de Blasio before the first officer was put in the ground.

What problem did Reid have with the energy bill? What were the amendments? I truly don't know.

Missed one thing. Concerning when McConnell made the comment about making Obama a one term president, he had to know that it was reported prior to Obama's oath of office. There is such a thing as "guilt by silence". He should have said something in early 2009 about the accuracy of the report.

This remains just another Regressive "yap, yap, yap".

The Regressives have no candidate who can pull out a Presidential win over Sec. Clinton. Their PACs are spending up to a BILLION dollars in the next few months to run negative ads against her to "villify" her. If they thought they had a chance of winning, they would trot out their candidates with positive positions on what THEY would do instead of concentrating on finding fault in the other prime contender.

Run scared, run Regressives!

Self satisfying, self gratification BS!

You are hard to keep up with.

You told a bold face lie relative to McConnell...I mean bold face made up stuff. Then you say "IT WAS REPORTED"....WHERE was it reported. This is an old wives tale oft times shown to be untrue in every aspect, and instead of admitting you told a lie and apologizing for it, you continue with the revisionist history. Most, who read BOTH SIDES know it is simply democratic folk lore yet despite knowing the truth you continue to repeat.

I did the googling at your request, and again you simply glide over the stupid links it brings, and remember there are the same links on the other side. THAT I will not argue with, but repeating downright fables and then just changing the link does not work with anyone who is remotely paying attention.

IRS...as I said, key person REFUSES to cooperate....much of the evidence was destroyed, so I make no claims as you do. I assume you have good solid info about how up front everything was. Sort of like ACORN was always an upright clean cut group UNTIL.

I actually find your posts amusing...no truth and very very old tales from wherever.

Real history is more important and you have proven so many times that you have no problem positives downright lies. You must be proud

Oh, and the politicizing of this tragic deaths and others ? I disagree on some and think it very clearly apparent he did on others, but I assure you that opinions do vary, and your disregard for any opinion except yours is very telling.

And since you never ever even read about all the Reid follies in the Senate, I must dismiss you as one who is led around by a movement and not facts. I can tell you what most left wing and right wing pundits are saying this morning, and then am in the process of reading more facts from both sides of the issues.

I am mocked and made fun of for my links, but I believe in knowing both sides, and if I am going to discuss it here or anywhere, be able to tell someone where they may validate what I am saying. Mouthing one sides line must be boring...you certainly learn nothing except some revised look at an issue, whether it be right or left.

But to simply tell lies and stand by them...not sure what there is to be said.

Oh and for those looking for quotes, revisit this quotes posted from Hillary Clinton.

They are hate filled, and ethnic driven. THAT is the kind of language you should be worried about that comes from your heart and soul, not from political maneuvering.

"

Yap, yap, yap.

What quotes posted by Hillary Clinton?

"“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base.” — Hillary Clinton makes up a ridiculous, untrue story about her trip to Bosnia."

This is a link to SNOPES where they speak to a number of things this woman has said....some true some not but even if one or two is all, and it is a lot more than that....WOW..

snopes.com: Hillary Clinton Quotes

"There’s no doubt, Hillary Clinton called Paul Fray a “f**king Jew *******.” If there were the slightest doubt, you can bet that vicious Hillary would have sicced her amoral $450-an-hour shyster David Kendall on every author, publication and news service that reported her anti-Semitic slur, regardless of how veiled and coy the media were about her vile outburst."

Hillary Clinton:

In this link they show how various media reported this...

And then and remember, these are validated instances with witnesses and most importantly, remarks such as these come from a persons heart and soul and are not campaign talk....

"In one particularly shocking passage in the book, Oppenheimer quotes a campaign official who describes an angry attack by Hillary in which she screams at him, "You ****ing Jew *******!"

Two sourced eyewitnesses confirmed to Oppenheimer that they heard the verbal assault."

HIllary Jewish Slurs Claimed In New Book

The actual quote was in a book "STATE OF A UNION: INSIDE THE COMPLEX MARRIAGE OF BILL AND HILLARY CLINTON " and in the book, he says there are other witness and the man who whom she was speaking verifies it.

Hard to think about someone with this heart and this mouth being president.

But.....Like what was said......"Yap, yap, yap." A well informed and astute comment if I ever heard one

This thread has lost any signs of objectivity. Perhaps a breather is in order

I done with this thread

Personal Best Regards:

I lied. Then, you are operating without a clue. After you called me a liar, I goggled when did McConnell have a meeting with fellow Republicans concerning making Obama a one term president. The comment McConnell made was in 2012. Before jumping for joy, here is the rest of the story. It probably was reported on MSNBC. Where did they get this from? Probably from President Obama. Due all the obstruction in his first year, he was convinced that the meeting was held prior to his swearing in. Other Democrats were convinced that it happened 9 months into his presidency. This is what the Washington Post reported in Sept. 2012. It is logical to assume that McConnell's statement was reported early in 2009. Why would it be necessary to report on the timing of the meeting, if it hadn't been reported previously? I know. The Washington Post knew we were going to have this conversation in 2015. So, they printed the article in 2012 to cover my ass. Wow, do I wheel such power.

You did not view The Daily Show of June 22nd on Comcast on demand. There is no way in hell that you could defend the outright hypocrisy of the Fox News reporters that you praised concerning the murders of nine people in SC, and the two police in New York. There is no parallel to this anywhere given the magnitude of the murders. Wait I lied! You don't lie. You just express a different version of the truth.

I defy you to show you where I stated that the IRS didn't obstruct the hearing. What a stated TWICE is the IRS wants to enforce the laws concerning 501(c)4 political action groups as written in early 50's, and never changed. Putting word in my mouth hardly qualifies as me lying. Reading into something that isn't there seems to be a quality you are very proud of.

You want to talk about lies, something you must know a lot about because you defend the down right king of the liar world Fox News. Fox News is fair and balanced. That is a down right lie. Repeating a lie over and over doesn't make it the truth. It only shows that you have no self respect. I didn't see any attempt what so ever in defending that outright lie other than the Democrat on The Five gets to have a say in the topics to be discussed. Four Republicans and one Democrat is balanced. Shouting down the one Democrat is fair. In what world is this true other than Fox News, and their viewers? Over 70% of Fox News reporting is directed at the Democrat party, and not in a good way. Fair and Balanced my ass.

I defy you to show me one place that I lied. It doesn't bother me to be called a liar. I just consider the source. Maybe I was wrong. Listening to Fox News you must feel that no one is capable of telling the truth. Reporting the truth on Fox News is a bridge too far for them.

Call someone a liar, and then run for cover. That sounds like the act of a real coward. But I could be wrong.

You are right this has gotten way out of hand.

You are truly delusional. You mix up opinion for facts. You jump from one proof to another and if that does not work, try another.

You flat out lied about McConnell. He did not make that statement at the beginning as you clearly claimed.....from the article...."McConnell made his remarks in an interview that appeared in the National Journal on Oct. 23, 2010

Then of course you jumped to that people thought as if you knew that.

This is a tireless discussion. The comments on Fox were OPINIONS...you present them as if they were presented as facts...THAT IS IMPOSSIBLE. OPINION IS NOT FACT.

This little thread is over. You are making things up, presenting things that are just not true and you cannot make them that way because someone told you it was...you really need to find out.

So have a nice evening, and my advise to you is to read a bit more of ALL sides of issues and concentrate on facts...not what you want to be facts but facts.

I am delusional. I was under the impression that you read and comprehend what is being written. Did you read the entire first paragraph? Do you have a problem with drawing a logical conclusion? That certainly appears to be case. You are just looking to see what you want to see.

I can't read. That is probably true too. The Washington Post wrote an article in Sept. 2012, which I read three hours ago, concerning when McConnell had the meeting about making Obama a one term president. The Post AGREED it was in 2010. What I stated was it was REPORTED in 2009 that McConnell had the meeting with fellow Republicans. You show me one place that I stated that the meeting was in 2009. You can't. I assume you do know what REPORTED means. Maybe I am wrong there.

AGAIN WHY WOULD THE POST WRITE IN ARTICLE IN 2012 ABOUT THE TIMING OF MC CONNELL'S MEETING, IF THERE WAS A QUESTION ABOUT WHEN IT OCCURED, AND WAS REPORTED? THE POST CERTAINLY WOULDN'T HAVE PICKED A DATE AFTER 2010 TO MAKE MCCONNELL LOOK BETTER. IT WAS REPORTED ON A NATIONAL NEWS STATION IN 2009 THAT THE MEETING WAS IN EARLY 2009. THAT IS WHY THE POST WROTE THE ARTICLE IN 2012 TO MAKE IT CLEAR WHEN THE DATE OF THE MEETING HAPPENED.

Do you have a habit of putting words in someone mouth, and then calling them a liar? That certainly appears so.

The reports on Fox News were opinions not facts. Unbelievable! These OPINIONS were made by people on Fox News, and the same people had completely DIFFERENT opinions on very similar murders. When they did it, that was perfectly acceptable. When someone else did the same thing, those people were completely wrong in doing it. It is impossible to look at what they reported and draw any other conclusion other than this is the height of HYPOCRISY.

I haven't made up anything. You on the other hand excel at it. Name calling, and distorting what people write is your game plan. I thought I was dealing with a reasonable person. I couldn't have been more wrong.

By the way, there is a good reason why I don't know what Reid did early this year. It has everything to do with my physical health in 2015. Not that you should care. I asked the question what he did, and immediately you said I was uninformed. Don't assume people are in good health around here. Maybe you should have just answered the question like any normal person would do. It appears that the only thing you want to do demean anyone that doesn't agree with you even if have to make things up to do so. You are the worse person to deal with, because you are under the false impression that you are all knowing.

Run and hide!

Some of us look forward to the pi$$ing contest of the past to fade away and allow real discussions of the threats to America of concern TODAY to resume or perhaps begin is more appropriate for some.

Do you mean to say that what Fox is saying, or what McConnell said years ago is not that important ? You mean you want discussions of what is happening now ?

Gee...this would certainly be a real hurdle to overcome for many posters !!!!

This thread is now on my no need to waste time on list.
:wave:

I am sick of this conversation to, and participated in it. Being called a liar over and over by someone, who thinks he is smarter than everyone else, it is not the path that I thought I would ever be dragged into.

I need an honest answer, if that is possible. Did you see anything in my first paragraph concerning when McConnell meeting occurred that I said that it happened in Jan, 2009. I said that it was reported in 2009, and back it up with an article from the Washington Post. Isn't taking that paragraph, and twisting it to fit your misguided beliefs, the real lie.

That is the reason why the McConnell meeting was bragged endlessly into these posts.

What I am saying about Fox News is, they are not "fair and balanced'. I don't have a problem with their reporting. I have a problem with that lie being repeated over and over. What is it designed to do make them feel better about themselves, or make their audience feel better about watching a Republican leaning station?

I would like an answer without the unnecessary name calling. Don't worry I have mellowed out. I got the last word in. You can't believe how happy that makes me!(lol)

FROM THIS POST..

"I need an honest answer, if that is possible. Did you see anything in my first paragraph concerning when McConnell meeting occurred that I said that it happened in Jan, 2009. I said that it was reported in 2009, and back it up with an article from the Washington Post. Isn't taking that paragraph, and twisting it to fit your misguided beliefs, the real lie."

FROM POST 45...your original

"Who started the war between the parties? McConnell and the Republicans made it clear from day one their goal was to make Obama a one term president."

No mention of 2009 anywhere in YOUR POST.

The Washington Post article was not posted here by you at all. It was posted in response to your post

FROM THIS POST

"What I am saying about Fox News is, they are not "fair and balanced'. I don't have a problem with their reporting. I have a problem with that lie being repeated over and over. What is it designed to do make them feel better about themselves, or make their audience feel better about watching a Republican leaning station?"

Have you ever watched, for example Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews on MSNBC ?

OPINIONS of commentators are not facts

I guess we are being civil again. Thank God. I am not a political junkie. I didn't lie in any of posts. When I hear something on the news, I believe it. Apparently in the current state of politics, that is character flaw. I guess that I am going to have live it.

When actual the date of McConnell was brought into question, that was the first time that I heard there was a dispute about the timing. That is when I goggled and found the Washington Post article. I just looking for that article again I can't find it. I didn't make up anything in my posts. The comment about Obama and the Democrats was in the article. I am going to have learn how to cut and paste an article. I didn't put a date in there, because prior to his oath of office would be 2009. Why would the Washington Post write an article in 2012, if the meeting wasn't reported sometime in 2009 or early 2010?

The only national news station that I watch on a regular basis is Morning Joe. I really think that is the only news show that is fair and balanced. When Mika speaks, I hit the mute button. All she wants to talk about is women issues. I haven't watched Rachel Maddow in years. I watch Chris Matthews sometimes, not often. I don't like anyone whose goal is to shout down someone, when he doesn't agree with what is being said by his guest. That is just plain rude.

To me "fair and balanced" has to apply to both opinions, and facts. When the show is called "The Five", balance would be two Democrats, and two Republicans, and one moderate Independent. Listen the tone of the reporters on Fox News other than the one you mentioned. They can't hide their hatred (maybe to strong) for President Obama. That is hardly fair.

As I stated, I am a moderate independent. Given the far right movement over the passed six years, the Republicans are making it hard to vote for them. I really like John Kasich. As I stated a Republican governor that accepted Medicaid funds given to states in the ACA, has my vote.

I was an accountant. The thing that really have to protect is your honesty. If you get caught lying or stealing and get fired, you are going to find it very hard to get another job. I just is worth being dishonest. I have carried that to here. What do you gain by lying, or making stuff up here? If you have to lie on a political board to support your argument, seek mental help.

Let's get back on subject, if we can. The rules were changed in 2012, that anyone eligible for the nomination would have to have the majority of votes in eight states. It can be changed again in 2016 to make it easier to be eligible.

I looked, but couldn't find out how many states were winner take all states. Given the amount of money some of the long shots have, it appears nobody will have enough delegates to win on the first ballot. I think that there will have to be a deal between the people left in the field. The vice president will probably come from the field. I think the best combination to run against Hillary will be Bush/Walker.