Heretic;1782157 wrote:You're the only one bringing up your writing skills this time; it didn't take much reasoning ability to figure out his post was stating that diplomat-dude wrote what he felt to be a compelling argument policy-wise in support of and that if you wrote one against, he would take your word as a decorated veteran. Since there is a bit of difference between making a compelling argument and simply tossing out the same buzz-words time and time again.
Correct.
like_that;1782120 wrote:lol whatever you say. Your posts scream denial. Just like you are an Obama apologist, you are now becoming a Hillary apologist. This whole thread is pretty much proving Hillary is a POS. Hell, even the left isn't sure about Hillary. Don't believe me, look at the polls. She is neck and neck with a fucking socialist LOL. Yet, you want to go out of your way to post an endorsement that will most likely be overshadowed by everything in the media in the grand scheme of things. Do you actually need an endorsement to help decide your vote, or are you just posting that to feel better about voting for Hillary? You parade his accolades, yet you dismiss Belly's (regardless of his posting behavior), because he disagrees with you. You want to parade this endorsement, yet the people who are actually close to Hillary every day, putting their lives on the line for her have unfavorable things to say about her. Somehow these people don't matter, because the SS has screwed up here and there (most likely not Hillary related either). Just like most government agencies and employees screw up here and there but you will take their word for it if it supports Hillary. Yeah, excuse me while I LMAO when you say you are not in denial.
Ok, where to start. This may be a long one.
First, I am not an Obama apologist. One this board, with all the posters to the right, it appears I am. I actually think the President has screwed up a numbers of things, the Healthcare law, his relations with Congress, the way he manages his NSC staff, Syria, North Korea (then again no one has gotten this right), Iraq post 2014, and Afghanistan to a certain degree. But, in the echo chamber of Obama can do no right, it appears I am lock step with him.
I actually am not a support of Clinton, if anyone, I kinda like Rubio at this point. But, I gotta see more on how advises him and how he plays out in a general election, if he makes it that far. In a general, if it is Trump or Crus v. Clinton, I will take Clinton, again, because at least I know what I am getting.
The post was in reference to how a diplomat from the W administration has decided to come out for Clinton and not for any other R. That to me, is big, as it shows that even someone from another administration, and a former State Department person, has thrown his support behind Clinton. It may not matter in the media driven culture, but to add nuance to the narrative, I posted it. I don’t’ need an endorsement to make a decision, but it does help to know how experts in a field feel about her.
I’ll also say to the anti-Clinton narrative, read portions of Bob Gates’s book when he was SECDEF and worked with Clinton. He actually says he had the utmost respect for her and her work, and he was amazed at how she was as a person and as SECSTATE. He stated pretty much all the vile thrown he didn’t understand in his dealings with her. So, I’ll take his word as well over the allegations thrown at her.
On the SS, fine, let’s take the words of several agents true, has it gone through an investigation, is there an IG report? If that has happened, then I’ll take their words more seriously.
I'm not the typical liberal or conservative poster here, I look more at nuance and multiple aspects of an opinion or issue. But, on here, I am easily put in the liberal box., Then again, Trump is a liberal next to Quaker.
