Hillary Clinton

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

Glad I wasn't the only one that noticed. I know quite a few Democrats who are above average intelligence and have a snobbish attitude the way they look down on people they consider less intelligent than themselves. Yet they are basically a cookie cutter democrat on every issue down to what flavor of ice cream to like, they never think against party lines.

I go against party lines quite often. I vote Republican 99+% of the time (I have voted for two Democrats in my life including elections at all levels).
Where I go away from the party platform is as follows.

I am an atheist.

I believe in a woman's right to chose.

I believe homosexuality is biological and is not a choice. On the other hand I do not want to watch two dudes kiss and I would appreciate if they just did their business in private and didn't show it to the world. Since I don't show my heterosexuality by showing affection in public to my girlfriend, I would appreciate the gay people doing the same. I don't think people should be defined by their sexual orientation. It should not be flaunted either way.

Thanks for pointing out that those of us who rarely pull the Dem Party lever are NOT necessarily followers of organized religions. I am actually a Ben Carson agnostic. As much as I disagree with Dr Carson on the foundations of his beliefs, I find his solutions to real problems miles ahead of everyone else who was in the run.

As for your belief in a woman's right to choose, I ask you to speak to would-have-been parents ten and twenty years down the road as to their feelings about murdering their children. You will find most of them living in misery (including the woman responsible for Roe v Wade who has done a 180 on the issue).

Finally, I mostly agree with your position on homosexuality. The one difference is that I believe it to be biological in MOST cases. My personal experiences with people I know (switch sides due to lack of sexual success) tell me that it is not 100% true. Other evidence is bi-sexuals and prison rape.

[Tom]

IT comes to this - you vote for
Hillary, or you vote to keep the constitution.
A vote for her reduces the court to an exclamation point for more failed liberal
policies and a completed loss of the freedoms we enjoy today.

Just look at the herd of demo-pigs in the House this week - including a POS pretending he was some big civil rights advocate - he was not. He is protesting due process of law, as are all the little piggies wallowing on the floor, where they belong, with the rest of the rats. This guy disgraces all those legitimate people who fought hard for civil rights. This guy disgraces our nation. The rest of them disgrace piggies.

[johnhannibalsmith]

None are classified (maybe at the time or at some time or something like that yeah that's the ticket) and all the work-related stuff is there (define 'is' again for us okay please) and it is outrageous to suggest that anything relevant was deleted (what do you mean by wipe, like toilet paper, and my ass and your head)...

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Former Secretary Hillary Clinton failed to turn over a copy of a key message involving problems caused by her use of a private homebrew email server, the State Department confirmed Thursday. The disclosure makes it unclear what other work-related emails may have been deleted by the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories...06-23-17-19-35

[Parkview_Pirate]

Before turning over her emails to the department for review and potential public release, Clinton and her lawyers withheld thousands of additional emails she said were clearly personal, such as those involving what she described as "planning Chelsea's wedding or my mother's funeral arrangements, condolence notes to friends as well as yoga routines, family vacations."

Clinton has never outlined in detail what criteria she and her lawyers used to determine which emails to release and which to delete, but her 2010 email with Abedin appears clearly work-related under the State Department's own criteria for agency records under the U.S. Freedom of Information Act.

You'd have to have your head buried pretty deep in the sand to think that Hillary didn't scrub the dirty emails out.

This is smelling more and more Watergate-like every day, as when Tricky Dick and Haig (and the sinister force) were working the ERASE button on the White House tapes.....rich in irony considering Hillary's history with Watergate.

[Tom]

Hillary is a good litmus test for stupidity.

[Inner Dirt]

Originally Posted by Jess Hawsen Arown

Thanks for pointing out that those of us who rarely pull the Dem Party lever are NOT necessarily followers of organized religions. I am actually a Ben Carson agnostic. As much as I disagree with Dr Carson on the foundations of his beliefs, I find his solutions to real problems miles ahead of everyone else who was in the run.

As for your belief in a woman's right to choose, I ask you to speak to would-have-been parents ten and twenty years down the road as to their feelings about murdering their children. You will find most of them living in misery (including the woman responsible for Roe v Wade who has done a 180 on the issue).

Finally, I mostly agree with your position on homosexuality. The one difference is that I believe it to be biological in MOST cases. My personal experiences with people I know (switch sides due to lack of sexual success) tell me that it is not 100% true. Other evidence is bi-sexuals and prison rape.

I see abortion as a last resort. Of course birth control, or adoption are much better alternatives. My opinion is 100% tied to the fact I don't see anything good coming from "forcing" a women to give birth to a child they don't want. I have seen women with bad health habits (drug, alcohol, cigarette, use) quit all the nasty habits cold turkey as soon as they were pregnant with a child they wanted. I could see the opposite happening if a women was forced to carry an unwanted child to term. I am sure we have all seen women who wanted children turn into raving lunatics while pregnant. What would happen if the same raving lunatic didn't want the child? I bet babies born with birth defects would shoot way up with women forced to carry to term that did not want to.

[letswastemoney]

Google is RIGGED to favor Hillary Clinton.

[delayjf]

Finally, I mostly agree with your position on homosexuality. The one difference is that I believe it to be biological in MOST cases. My personal experiences with people I know (switch sides due to lack of sexual success) tell me that it is not 100% true. Other evidence is bi-sexuals and prison rape.

Since this subject has come up, below is an interesting article regarding the LGBT hijacking of the American Psychiatric Association.

http://www.wnd.com/2016/05/whats-rea...gender-mania/#

Regarding the genetics theory behind sexual orientation.

Part and parcel of the decision to reclassify conditions once considered mental illnesses – like homosexuality and transsexuality – as normal, benign, healthy sexual or gender “orientations,” is a determination that these proclivities are largely determined by genetics.

But a generation ago, before the search for the elusive and hypothetical “gay gene” ever began, psychologists and psychiatrists believed aberrant sexual attractions and obsessions often were rooted in childhood trauma.

Is it true? Certainly it’s undeniable that little children, being so exquisitely impressionable, are powerfully shaped by the environment in which they grow up. Early sexual abuse, for example, can be devastating, and it’s a sad fact that our prisons house many child molesters who were themselves molested as children.

Objective consideration of true causes is also complicated by the fact that today’s psychiatric priesthood just doesn’t seem that interested. Ever-increasing weight is instead placed on biological factors like genetics, infections, brain defects or injury, prenatal damage, substance abuse and poor nutrition. Moreover, even when factors like childhood abuse (physical, emotional or sexual), divorce, death in the family, etc., are considered, the “therapy” – almost always, drugs – doesn’t deal with the trauma. How, for example, can psychiatric drugs undo a young woman’s hatred and feelings of betrayal toward her father for having abused and/or abandoned her when she was a little girl?

The evolving medical philosophy that says our mental health problems are determined largely by genetics and other mysterious biological factors is increasingly at war with reality.

[Jess Hawsen Arown]

Originally Posted by Inner Dirt

I see abortion as a last resort. Of course birth control, or adoption are much better alternatives. My opinion is 100% tied to the fact I don't see anything good coming from "forcing" a women to give birth to a child they don't want. I have seen women with bad health habits (drug, alcohol, cigarette, use) quit all the nasty habits cold turkey as soon as they were pregnant with a child they wanted. I could see the opposite happening if a women was forced to carry an unwanted child to term. I am sure we have all seen women who wanted children turn into raving lunatics while pregnant. What would happen if the same raving lunatic didn't want the child? I bet babies born with birth defects would shoot way up with women forced to carry to term that did not want to.

I generally agree with your "last resorts" and consider them as justifiable homicide. My main issue is with pro-choice extremists who, by definition, would allow a woman to terminate her child if she was having a bad hair day -- or thinks the father was cheating on her and uses that abortion as a way to get even -- or other such nonsense.

[reckless]

Originally Posted by Tom

Hillary is a good litmus test for stupidity.

Even Hillary showed us another side of her very own stupidity!

The comical, anti-Trump speech she gave was laid out for her on a teleprompter.

One of her scheduled 'barbs' at Trump was to end with her ::sighing:: .... the dopes that work for her never realized that she is even dumber than they are. They wrote in the teleprompter the word 'sigh', meaning for her to sigh.

She gave the talking point ... then she ... well, watch for yourself. It's hilarious how really stupid this loathsome woman truly is.

http://710wor.iheart.com/onair/mark-...word-14842073/

[Greyfox]

Originally Posted by reckless

She gave the talking point ... then she ... well, watch for yourself. It's hilarious how really stupid this loathsome woman truly is.

http://710wor.iheart.com/onair/mark-...word-14842073/

That is fodder for some type of a "Dumb Blonde Joke."

[woodtoo]

That is Hillerlyarious SIGH.

[Tom]

loser@kinkos.com

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by reckless

Even Hillary showed us another side of her very own stupidity!

The comical, anti-Trump speech she gave was laid out for her on a teleprompter.

One of her scheduled 'barbs' at Trump was to end with her ::sighing:: .... the dopes that work for her never realized that she is even dumber than they are. They wrote in the teleprompter the word 'sigh', meaning for her to sigh.

She gave the talking point ... then she ... well, watch for yourself. It's hilarious how really stupid this loathsome woman truly is.

http://710wor.iheart.com/onair/mark-...word-14842073/

They actually pay this guy Mark Simone to write/post stuff like this? Sigh.
Most likely, Hillary said the word rather than just sighing, because she did not trust dumb Republicans to get it.

Go ahead and vote for Trump because of his sighing prowess. I will vote for Hillary because her experience, intelligence and sound policy positions even if she can't sigh.

[PaceAdvantage]

Originally Posted by mostpost

I will vote for Hillary because her experience, intelligence and sound policy positions even if she can't sigh.

Her best policy position is always "What difference, at this point, does it make?"