How is she not embarassed to go into public How is she not embarassed to go into public - Page 2 - Talk of The Villages Florida

How is she not embarassed to go into public

 
Thread Tools
  #16  
Old 09-23-2015, 12:46 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Ok I will accept the challenge of naming a major accomplishment ... she basically destroyed the Libyan government and was complicit in the Syrian situation. Thus, she enabled the creation of ISIS and, among other things, the ongoing destruction of what's left of Christianity in the Middle East and the rising Islamic invasion via refuges in Europe.

Her level of incompetence is pretty impressive by any standards ...
Wait for it.......waiting for the Bush's fault defense......wait for it...

It's the liberal way. They are not responsible for anything except what is all good and free.
  #17  
Old 09-23-2015, 12:49 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
You want her accomplishments well here you go.

5 Top Highlights in Hillary Clinton

You should take a better look at the creation of ISIS. It's real hard not to blame the current situation in the ME on the invasion of Iraq by "W". If you want to shift the responsibility from "W" to the intelligence he receive, that is totally reasonable, and the right thing to do. Shifting the creation of ISIS to Clinton is a real stretch.
Ha! I knew it! Someone owes me a coke. I knew you would blame it on Bush. So predictable!!!
  #18  
Old 09-23-2015, 01:00 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Ha! I knew it! Someone owes me a coke. I knew you would blame it on Bush. So predictable!!!
It's a shame, but you can pretty much book it that President Bush will be blamed for just about anything.

Truth is that this particular issue, as with most is complicated, and I really don't think "Monday Morning Quaterbacking" much further back than the last two or three decisions serve much purpose. As they say it is what it is.
  #19  
Old 09-23-2015, 03:43 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Blame is kindergarten level living.

Real, that is REAL executive positions include everything they inherit the day they take over the position. There is no such thing as making excuses for either doing or not doing something or doing something wrong or as in the case of our current administration, DOING NOTHING AT ALL.

That is for amateurs and shcool yards.

If it is humanly possible to forget the past, and please enlighten us as to the actions Obama has taken to decimate and destroy ISIS. Remember those famous words from over a year ago!!!???

ISIS since his yaking about eliminating ISIS has taken over more area and cities in more countries. They have multiplied in size to become a major, well organized, well financed terrorist entity sworn to kill us all.

This has all happened starting with the Obama talk-job to today.
His doing on his watch...nobody to blame but him.

But enough of this COMMON knowledge about are leader in abesence.

Back to all the good stuff about the unethical, un trustworthy, liar candidate Clinton. Even her own people cannot tell you what she accomplished; how impressive is that? She is what she is. A worn out, past her prime (if there ever was such a thing), tired looking incompetent, untrustworthy, unethical, liar. Yup she can claim to be a possible female candidate that has to have people tell her how to act to be liked....how to APPEAR to be warm and fuzzy ().....phony.
  #20  
Old 09-23-2015, 04:37 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I am voting for Hillary because she is a Democrat that can beat a Republican. I always vote for the Democrats. Just like you Republicans always vote for Republicans. I think Hillary has the best chance in the primary that is why I am voting for her.
  #21  
Old 09-23-2015, 05:43 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
You want her accomplishments well here you go.

5 Top Highlights in Hillary Clinton

You should take a better look at the creation of ISIS. It's real hard not to blame the current situation in the ME on the invasion of Iraq by "W". If you want to shift the responsibility from "W" to the intelligence he receive, that is totally reasonable, and the right thing to do. Shifting the creation of ISIS to Clinton is a real stretch.

Your position, and argument, is a total joke and most people quickly recognize it as such. W should not have gone to Iraq true, BUT Obie and Hillary inherited a stable Iraq when they flushed it down the toilet in 2011 for purely political gain ...ie 2012 election.

You simply can't keep dodging who's clearly responsible in this case ...
  #22  
Old 09-23-2015, 05:59 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
I am voting for Hillary because she is a Democrat that can beat a Republican. I always vote for the Democrats. Just like you Republicans always vote for Republicans. I think Hillary has the best chance in the primary that is why I am voting for her.
Will you still vote for her after she's indicted?
  #23  
Old 09-23-2015, 10:00 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
The article is mostly opinions and hyperbole and very thin on substantive facts. As far as the rise ISIS and George W., why not place the blame where it belongs...with Obama when he created a vacuum in the Middle East by withdrawing our troops from Iraq.
Why not, because "W" signed an agreement with Maliki with a date certain for US troops to be out of Iraq. Obama honored that date.
  #24  
Old 09-23-2015, 10:05 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Ha! I knew it! Someone owes me a coke. I knew you would blame it on Bush. So predictable!!!
No! What is predictable is Republicans not accepting anything that they did that contributed to the mess in the Middle East. Have another coke!
  #25  
Old 09-23-2015, 10:06 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Why not, because "W" signed an agreement with Maliki with a date certain for US troops to be out of Iraq. Obama honored that date.
Willful suspension of thinking on your part not to mention revisionist history of the worst type .... Obama was the leader who needed to make things works and guess what? He's not a leader and he wanted out so he used the excuse of blaming W, figuring he would be able to bamboozle the usual credulous fellow travelers ... as he apparently did with you.

Obama is the most successful Muslim Jihadi in several hundred years actually ... since 1683 when the Turks were pushed back from Vienna.
  #26  
Old 09-23-2015, 10:17 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Blame is kindergarten level living.

Real, that is REAL executive positions include everything they inherit the day they take over the position. There is no such thing as making excuses for either doing or not doing something or doing something wrong or as in the case of our current administration, DOING NOTHING AT ALL.

That is for amateurs and shcool yards.

If it is humanly possible to forget the past, and please enlighten us as to the actions Obama has taken to decimate and destroy ISIS. Remember those famous words from over a year ago!!!???

ISIS since his yaking about eliminating ISIS has taken over more area and cities in more countries. They have multiplied in size to become a major, well organized, well financed terrorist entity sworn to kill us all.

This has all happened starting with the Obama talk-job to today.
His doing on his watch...nobody to blame but him.

But enough of this COMMON knowledge about are leader in abesence.

Back to all the good stuff about the unethical, un trustworthy, liar candidate Clinton. Even her own people cannot tell you what she accomplished; how impressive is that? She is what she is. A worn out, past her prime (if there ever was such a thing), tired looking incompetent, untrustworthy, unethical, liar. Yup she can claim to be a possible female candidate that has to have people tell her how to act to be liked....how to APPEAR to be warm and fuzzy ().....phony.
Just curious, what should Obama be doing to stop ISIS? American people do not want him to send ground troops into Iraq, and then Syria. What is his option?
  #27  
Old 09-23-2015, 10:32 PM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Your position, and argument, is a total joke and most people quickly recognize it as such. W should not have gone to Iraq true, BUT Obie and Hillary inherited a stable Iraq when they flushed it down the toilet in 2011 for purely political gain ...ie 2012 election.

You simply can't keep dodging who's clearly responsible in this case ...
Laugh this one off!

Was Obama wrong to withdraw troops from Iraq? - The Washington Post

You can't keep blaming Obama for everything that has gone wrong in the Middle East.
  #28  
Old 09-24-2015, 07:51 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
Just curious, what should Obama be doing to stop ISIS? American people do not want him to send ground troops into Iraq, and then Syria. What is his option?
American people don't want a war in the U.S. either. Americans don't like to pay taxes. Americans don't want illegal aliens in our country, but the Dems make excuses that it's too hard to remove them. Americans don't want Obamacare but this administration forced it upon us. Americans don't want a lot of things that the gov does, but they do it anyway, right?

Not to belittle the wars in the middle East, but we lost 60,000 Americans in Vietnam (started by a Dem and finished by a Repub, right or wrong). How many have died furthering democracy and freedom in the Middle East? The difference is that we fought socialism and communism in Vietnam and we are fighting Islamic jihad in the Middle East. Like I said, not to belittle the ME wars, but come back and tell me about it once the death toll is anywhere near 60,000 Americans. No war is ideal, but I would rather that we fought overseas than here in the U.S. of A. And the way it is going with this liberal in the White House, the war is getting pretty personal and not that far away.

And before you speak for others regarding sending troops overseas, remember that we have warriors in the military that train every day to be used that way. Not to fight and retreat, but to fight and win. Politicians create failure in wars, not the military. And before you ask me if I have contributed to the effort, yes I have and still would if called. That's the American way.

You need not agree with me, but you do need to explain your reason for going against American standards by adopting European socialist principles. You need to explain why we should even consider a minority complaint against the majority theme. The majority of Americans will bend or compromise to a minority request IF it does not go against ingrained American standards, ethics or morals that they grew up with. Caving in to minority complaints of unfair treatment does not mean the majority should suffer or sacrifice for the few. Tolerance of the lazy, criminal minority by race, or gender challenged only goes so far. We can bend but we won't change our standards, morals and ethics just to cater to the minute minority group of unruly deviants.
  #29  
Old 09-24-2015, 08:24 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
American people don't want a war in the U.S. either. Americans don't like to pay taxes. Americans don't want illegal aliens in our country, but the Dems make excuses that it's too hard to remove them. Americans don't want Obamacare but this administration forced it upon us. Americans don't want a lot of things that the gov does, but they do it anyway, right?

Not to belittle the wars in the middle East, but we lost 60,000 Americans in Vietnam (started by a Dem and finished by a Repub, right or wrong). How many have died furthering democracy and freedom in the Middle East? The difference is that we fought socialism and communism in Vietnam and we are fighting Islamic jihad in the Middle East. Like I said, not to belittle the ME wars, but come back and tell me about it once the death toll is anywhere near 60,000 Americans. No war is ideal, but I would rather that we fought overseas than here in the U.S. of A. And the way it is going with this liberal in the White House, the war is getting pretty personal and not that far away.

And before you speak for others regarding sending troops overseas, remember that we have warriors in the military that train every day to be used that way. Not to fight and retreat, but to fight and win. Politicians create failure in wars, not the military. And before you ask me if I have contributed to the effort, yes I have and still would if called. That's the American way.

You need not agree with me, but you do need to explain your reason for going against American standards by adopting European socialist principles. You need to explain why we should even consider a minority complaint against the majority theme. The majority of Americans will bend or compromise to a minority request IF it does not go against ingrained American standards, ethics or morals that they grew up with. Caving in to minority complaints of unfair treatment does not mean the majority should suffer or sacrifice for the few. Tolerance of the lazy, criminal minority by race, or gender challenged only goes so far. We can bend but we won't change our standards, morals and ethics just to cater to the minute minority group of unruly deviants.
Fine. Now answer the question, what should Obama do to stop ISIS?

Comparing not wanting to pay taxes to not wanting to send ground troops to stop ISIS is totally unbelievable. If we don't pay taxes, the country doesn't function. If we don't stop ISIS, the country is just fine. ISIS is going to invade the US with large number of ground troops? That is what you are implying.

Russia with its alliance with Assad, and Iran with its Muslim leaning (Shia, or Suni, I can't tell one from the other) with Iran will take a more active role in getting rid of ISIS. The enemy of our enemy( double negative) is our friend. ISIS is a more direct threat to them, because they are in the immediate area. If you want to call it leading from behind, go right ahead.

Iraq should be split into three countries. ISIS controlling one of them is an option. At some point on the near future, Assad has got to go.
  #30  
Old 09-24-2015, 08:27 AM
Guest
n/a
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guest View Post
.

Iraq should be split into three countries. ISIS controlling one of them is an option. At some point on the near future, Assad has got to go.
I have to correct a really big typing error. ISIS controlling one of them ISN'T an option.
 

Tags
clinton, emails, state, board, editorial, asked, meeting, departments, lied, day, discrepancy, characterization, turned, explain, sunday, secretaries, register, unraveling, reporter, letter, woman, manipulated, answered, answer, habit


You are viewing a new design of the TOTV site. Click here to revert to the old version.

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:21 AM.