Ohio Chatter
Ohio Chatter

Forums

All Threads Serious Business Sports Politics Archive Pick 'ems Wordio
Log In Create Account

Hillary Clinton

Home ▸ Archive ▸ Politics ▸ Hillary Clinton
Ytowngirlinfla's avatar

Ytowngirlinfla

I wear real chevrons!

2,295 posts
May 21, 2015 1:46 AM
Belly35;1729869 wrote:four dead Americans on her watch and asleep at the switch
How many dead military members because of Bush's WMD and the invasion of Iraq?
May 20, 2015 9:46pm
S

superman

Senior Member

3,582 posts
May 21, 2015 1:48 AM
Ytowngirlinfla;1729984 wrote:How many dead military members because of Bush's WMD and the invasion of Iraq?
Liberals bringing up Bush. Shocking.
May 20, 2015 9:48pm
Ytowngirlinfla's avatar

Ytowngirlinfla

I wear real chevrons!

2,295 posts
May 21, 2015 1:49 AM
superman;1729987 wrote:Liberals bringing up Bush. Shocking.
I'm not even a liberal but if you are going to blame Hilary you might as well blame Bush as well.
May 20, 2015 9:49pm
S

superman

Senior Member

3,582 posts
May 21, 2015 2:10 AM
Ytowngirlinfla;1729989 wrote:I'm not even a liberal but if you are going to blame Hilary you might as well blame Bush as well.
Liberal refusing to own what they are. Shocking.
May 20, 2015 10:10pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
May 21, 2015 3:38 AM
Ytowngirlinfla;1729989 wrote:I'm not even a liberal but if you are going to blame Hilary you might as well blame Bush as well.
No you shouldn't, that completely irrelevant and a huge cop out. Bush has no power in this country and never will again. We are talking about a potential POTUS and you want to bring up a former president to deflect. The fact you (or anybody who uses this cop out) have to use bush as a measuring stick for Hillary/Obama says enough about them.

Maybe after 20 years we will stop hearing this cop out response.
May 20, 2015 11:38pm
J

jmog

Senior Member

6,567 posts
May 21, 2015 1:34 PM
Ytowngirlinfla;1729984 wrote:How many dead military members because of Bush's WMD and the invasion of Iraq?
Please feel free to explain what GW Bush has to do with the next Presidential election. That comment was not only needlessly inflammatory (as in it had nothing to do with the thread topic) but it has no bearing on the next election.

With that in mind...

Mrs. Ytowngirlinfla, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
May 21, 2015 9:34am
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
May 21, 2015 2:05 PM
like_that;1730098 wrote:No you shouldn't, that completely irrelevant and a huge cop out.
You'd think after 6+ years people still wouldn't be lowering the bar with "what about Bush". I mean, what does one accomplish arguing someone sucks less (debatable) than Bush?

So you voted for him/her because they aren't as bad as Bush?!? Well, the country is in good hands.
May 21, 2015 10:05am
Q

QuakerOats

Senior Member

8,740 posts
May 21, 2015 3:03 PM
  • "SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL, pictured, a longtime Clinton confidant, reportedly advised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two days after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack that an Al Qaeda-tied group had planned the deadly assault and used a protest as cover — but despite this warning, Clinton's UN ambassador went on to publicly claim it was 'spontaneous.'"



    To think that this corrupt, lying, bitch is even in the presidential race discussion is absolutely mind-blowing.
May 21, 2015 11:03am
Belly35's avatar

Belly35

Elderly Intellectual

9,716 posts
May 21, 2015 3:14 PM
ptown_trojans_1;1729874 wrote:She has been cleared of any misconduct by the R led Congress.
But, yeah sure blame her.

If we go that rational then every single SEC STATE has had blood on their hands.
Benghazi Bombshell: Clinton pal told her attack was planned, Al Qaeda-tied

Emails reportedly show confidant told Clinton Benghazi attack planned by AQ-tied fighters


SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL, pictured, a longtime Clinton confidant, reportedly advised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two days after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack that an Al Qaeda-tied group had planned the deadly assault and used a protest as cover — but despite this warning,


Asleep at the switch ..... didn't take her duty serious, politics for profit not for the interest of the Ameican people...
May 21, 2015 11:14am
TedSheckler's avatar

TedSheckler

Emporium Entrepreneur

3,974 posts
May 21, 2015 4:19 PM
jmog;1730130 wrote: Mrs. Ytowngirlinfla, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
A simple "wrong" would have done just fine...
May 21, 2015 12:19pm
Apple's avatar

Apple

Prost!

2,620 posts
May 22, 2015 1:05 AM
Belly35;1730146 wrote:Benghazi Bombshell: Clinton pal told her attack was planned, Al Qaeda-tied

Emails reportedly show confidant told Clinton Benghazi attack planned by AQ-tied fighters


SIDNEY BLUMENTHAL, pictured, a longtime Clinton confidant, reportedly advised then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton two days after the 2012 Benghazi terror attack that an Al Qaeda-tied group had planned the deadly assault and used a protest as cover — but despite this warning,


Asleep at the switch ..... didn't take her duty serious, politics for profit not for the interest of the Ameican people...
Looks like Trey Gowdy is on the Blumenthal connection with the Congressional investigation.

http://freebeacon.com/politics/clinton-foundation-silent-on-blumenthals-exit-date/
May 21, 2015 9:05pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
May 22, 2015 2:44 AM
How are Democrats not getting nervous? Hillary isn't quite as teflon as Slick Willy, and the Republican nominee is going to have plenty to attack Clinton on with honesty and transparency.

Then again, maybe the liberal media will fall in line and this is all just an effort to later dismiss it as "old news" and "no there there".
May 21, 2015 10:44pm
like_that's avatar

like_that

1st Team All-PWN

26,625 posts
May 22, 2015 4:24 AM
gut;1730310 wrote:How are Democrats not getting nervous? Hillary isn't quite as teflon as Slick Willy, and the Republican nominee is going to have plenty to attack Clinton on with honesty and transparency.

Then again, maybe the liberal media will fall in line and this is all just an effort to later dismiss it as "old news" and "no there there".
They will definitely dismiss it as old news while also still bringing up Bush [emoji23].
May 22, 2015 12:24am
cruiser_96's avatar

cruiser_96

Senior Member

7,536 posts
May 22, 2015 1:12 PM
Once again the myth of a "Liberal Media Bias" is exposed for the joke (and lie) that it is! The Clintons are now victims of a vicious group of activists weilding the pen - er, computer. For shame.
May 22, 2015 9:12am
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
May 22, 2015 3:42 PM
cruiser_96;1730410 wrote:Once again the myth of a "Liberal Media Bias" is exposed for the joke (and lie) that it is!
LMAO, they don't even try to hide it any more. Just because the media may not be as liberal as you doesn't mean they aren't biased.
May 22, 2015 11:42am
W

wkfan

Senior Member

1,641 posts
May 22, 2015 5:10 PM
http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/apexchange/2015/05/22/us--dem-2016-clinton-emails.html

HRC received classified emails on her private email......

All the more reason to force her to turn ALL e-mails over the DOJ.

Does anyone still think the reason that she had used a private email for SOS mail was so that she did not have to carry two cell phones?
May 22, 2015 1:10pm
cruiser_96's avatar

cruiser_96

Senior Member

7,536 posts
May 22, 2015 5:23 PM
gut;1730454 wrote:LMAO, they don't even try to hide it any more. Just because the media may not be as liberal as you doesn't mean they aren't biased.
Hey! I'm not a liberal. I prefer "Communist"! ;) :D ;)
May 22, 2015 1:23pm
cruiser_96's avatar

cruiser_96

Senior Member

7,536 posts
May 22, 2015 5:25 PM
wkfan;1730465 wrote:http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/apexchange/2015/05/22/us--dem-2016-clinton-emails.html

HRC received classified emails on her private email......

All the more reason to force her to turn ALL e-mails over the DOJ.

Does anyone still think the reason that she had used a private email for SOS mail was so that she did not have to carry two cell phones?
Do you honestly believe that the very people who would vote for her care? #BlindAllegience
May 22, 2015 1:25pm
G

gut

Senior Member

15,058 posts
May 22, 2015 6:26 PM
wkfan;1730465 wrote:http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/apexchange/2015/05/22/us--dem-2016-clinton-emails.html

HRC received classified emails on her private email......

All the more reason to force her to turn ALL e-mails over the DOJ.

Does anyone still think the reason that she had used a private email for SOS mail was so that she did not have to carry two cell phones?
I think it's funny watching her call for the release of her emails as some sort of commitment to transparency....you know, the emails that her group already screened before turning over to the DOJ.

I've only seen it mentioned in passing, but I'm quite concerned her ability as POTUS could be compromised if the Russians, Chinese or anyone else has incriminating emails of hers. Knowing Clinton, there's definitely some shady stuff...and it's something more than "unlikely" she was hacked.
May 22, 2015 2:26pm
Classyposter58's avatar

Classyposter58

Senior Member

6,321 posts
May 22, 2015 8:22 PM
Yeah she's screwed


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
May 22, 2015 4:22pm
DeyDurkie5's avatar

DeyDurkie5

Senior Member

11,324 posts
May 23, 2015 1:52 AM
Shut it down, classy has spoken
May 22, 2015 9:52pm
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
May 24, 2015 3:50 AM
like_that;1730098 wrote:No you shouldn't, that completely irrelevant and a huge cop out. Bush has no power in this country and never will again. We are talking about a potential POTUS and you want to bring up a former president to deflect. The fact you (or anybody who uses this cop out) have to use bush as a measuring stick for Hillary/Obama says enough about them.

Maybe after 20 years we will stop hearing this cop out response.
Yes it is irrelevant if sticking to the context of this thread. But you bet your sweet ass it's relevant to the big picture if one wants to rationally discuss dead Americans because of bad policy.
May 23, 2015 11:50pm
F

Footwedge

Senior Member

9,265 posts
May 24, 2015 3:57 AM
jmog;1730130 wrote:Please feel free to explain what GW Bush has to do with the next Presidential election. That comment was not only needlessly inflammatory (as in it had nothing to do with the thread topic) but it has no bearing on the next election.

With that in mind...

Mrs. Ytowngirlinfla, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this thread is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Irrelevant to the thread ..agreed. People being dumber for reading it? Hardly. How many Americans still give Bush a free pass for the loss of American soldiers over a pack of lies? What's really amazing is all the ass clowns like you that...after all that is now known as fact...still justify the criminal invasion in Iraq. Beyond pathetic....and a truly sorry commentary on how partisan hacks use tunnel vision glasses.
May 23, 2015 11:57pm
HitsRus's avatar

HitsRus

Senior Member

9,206 posts
May 24, 2015 1:46 PM
Charles Krauthammer has a great article today that is particularly relevant to this discussion. You can argue whether the war was a mistake, based on a false premise, or was too costly in American lives....but Bush handed off to Obama a victory. what has transpired since is even worse, because it has negated what we paid so dearly for......and that is entirely related to the next election, and those responsible for it.
http://www.omaha.com/opinion/charles-krauthammer-there-s-no-question-who-authored-latest-iraq/article_3ed7e855-cc97-54ec-abd5-fbe47c17cb8b.html
May 24, 2015 9:46am