jump to last post 1-16 of 16 discussions (66 posts)

Have you heard this about Hillary??

  1. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    Obviously, I'm on the puter, but hubby is watching the news, so I can't help but hear it, also. Knowing my husband, I'm sure it's FOX he's watching, just to let you know.

    Democrat delegates for the 2008 election were just being interviewed, and they claim that they were forced to cast their votes for Obama when they intended to vote for Hil. Do you know anything about this?

    1. Sylvie Strong profile image60
      Sylvie Strongposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Of course they were compelled.  Hilary was popular in the democratic party establishment and it is no surprise that some delegates would have preferred her.  But delegates are agents of the democratic party.  It would be perverse indeed if Obama was entitled to lead the ticket for the democratic party in the general election based on the will of voters during the democratic primaries (and he was) and then Hilary is selected to run for president in his stead because of the preferences of unelected delegates.

      1. William R. Wilson profile image61
        William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        This.

    2. Daniel Carter profile image91
      Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Obama one-upped her. Hil just didn't have enough time to think about rigging it all in her favor, otherwise, she would have done it first. She is as calculating as the president. No ifs, ands, or buts.

    3. 0
      sandra rinckposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      hahahha, Fox tells so many lies it is just silly.  Their new plan of attack is to force all their local news networks to report the same garbage.  Sad, so sad.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image60
        Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        What are the lies?

        1. Pcunix profile image89
          Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Why don't you watch it and see for yourself (Jim has said elsewhere that he doesn't get to see Fox News).   Or check their website?  Contrast that against news that really is "Fair and Balanced" like National Public Radio.

          How do I know that is fair?  Because they tell me things I don't like as often as they tell me things that support my views.  Because they do honest interviews with Conservatives and Liberals without snide commentary.

          Fox News was banned from either England or the U.K (I forget) specifically because of their obvious conservative bias.   The network is plainly an outlet for Rupert's personal opinions.

          1. Jim Hunter profile image60
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            So what are the lies?

            Isn't sky news the fox sister station in the UK?
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky_News

            Isn't it owned by Rupert Murdoch?

            He owns quite a bit of media in the UK.

            Seems your news isn't too reliable.

            1. Pcunix profile image89
              Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              My apologies. It was Canada.  You might want to go read the Wikipediia article on the channel you don't watch but think is wonderful just the same.

              I think it is rather interesting how many conservatives claim never to have watched Fox, but are quick to defend it anyway.

              1. Jim Hunter profile image60
                Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                I'm always quick to defend anybody or anything from the lies of the left.

                I won't even bother to find out if you are correct about Canada I will assume its just more of the same.

                I couldn't resist looking. 

                Wikipedia says fox is shown in Canada.
                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_news#Other_countries

        2. William R. Wilson profile image61
          William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Pretty much anything that comes out of Glenn Beck's mouth.

          1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
            Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            The problem with Glenn Beck is that his opinions cannot be backed up by evidence.  He has developed some strange, sick following and unfortunately that following largely believes Beck’s words are gospel.  Recently, as you probably know, he launched his own online university where individuals can take classes on history, economy, and religion.  Yikes.  Learning history and economics from Glenn Beck would be like trying to learn respect and humility from Kanye West.

            Here are some of Glenn Beck’s claims, all proven completely false by Pulitzer Prize winning site politifact.com:

            1. Labor union president Andy Stern is “most frequent visitor” at the White House.
            2.Less than 10% of Obama’s Cabinet appointees “have any experience in the private sector.”
            3.“Mitt Romney … gave you government health care that is now bankrupting the state” of Massachusetts.
            4.Forty-five percent of doctors “say they’ll quit” if health care reform passes.
            5.“Why do we have automatic citizenship upon birth? We’re the only country in the world that has it.”
            6.“In the health care bill, we’re now offering insurance for dogs.”
            7.John Holdren, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, “has proposed forcing abortions and putting sterilants in the drinking water to control population.”
            8.Franklin Roosevelt never allocated more than 12 percent of GDP to federal spending, while the percentage for Barack Obama is not projected to drop below 22.8 percent.
            9.Chile ranks third internationally in economic freedom, while the U.S. ranks 17th.
            10.“You don’t know if this (the H1N1 vaccine) is gonna cause neurological damage like it did in the 1970s.”
            There are hundreds more of course, but the main point of concern is this: What happens to education when it is based upon opinions without evidence?  What happens to education when poor opinions are disguised as fact?

            Previously, I used to simply think that lunatics like Beck and Limbaugh were simply “entertainers.”  I falsely hoped that their audience understood that they were crazy and delusional, and that they made such ridiculous statements only to grow their audience.  I assumed it was all about money: I’ll say the dumbest things I can so people keep returning to hear what dumb thing I’ll say next.  But now Beck has his own university?

            You realize of course that some percentage of Fox viewers will enroll in Beck’s university and consider themselves to be educated in history, economics, and religion, right?  You realize how scary that is, right?  Of course, Beck’s university is in no way accredited and whatever “degree” you earn from it won’t mean anything at all.  Glnen Beck does not even have a graduate level degree.  How can he pretend to create a university

            http://joechianakas.wordpress.com/2010/ … niversity/

            1. Jim Hunter profile image60
              Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              "Learning history and economics from Glenn Beck would be like trying to learn respect and humility from Kanye West."

              I don't think he could teach me much about history but the guy is obviously making some money.

              1. William R. Wilson profile image61
                William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

                And that's a sure sign of virtue in Libertarian Land.

          2. Jim Hunter profile image60
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Is he a news anchor?

        3. Ralph Deeds profile image67
          Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Turn on you Television tonight and you'll hear three hours of lies, spin and misinformation.

          1. Jim Hunter profile image60
            Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Ive been getting that here from your buddies.

            Is fox only on for 3 hours?

            I see you are talking about the commentators who are expressing their opinion.

            How is that different from MSNBC?

      2. donotfear profile image91
        donotfearposted 6 years ago in reply to this


        I thought this thread was about Hillary Clinton?

  2. 0
    ralwusposted 6 years ago

    Well, I figured the fix was in when the Kennedys sided with Obama.

  3. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    Normally all women, irrespespective of nationality, are very much short tempered and will take hasty decisions. They will not analyse the pros and cons of their actions and decisions. In a time when America is pitted in an economic crisis, it would have proved disastrous if Ms.Hillary became President.

    In 1971, when Mrs.Indira Gandhi was Indian Prime Minister, she one day called on Gen.Maneksha, then Army chief and march the army into East Pakistan. But the Army Chief prevailed on her not to act hastily and time was not ripe for that. It was harvest season. All the muslim countries were with Pakistan. No other country would help India, if war breaks out. So, she let the suffering of East Bengalis to their fate for 9 months, suffering at the hands of Pakistan army. Taking all precautions, she declared war on 3-12-1971 on Pakistan and reaped a decisive victory. If she had ignored the Army chief's advise at that time, history would have been different.

    That is the difference between men and women in critical times. This applies to Ms.Hillary also.

    1. Pearldiver profile image87
      Pearldiverposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Well.... I suppose if you are correct.. then we would have to blame your mother for your ability to generalise with such raw wisdom. roll

      1. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
        VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        My mother is different for me. She cared for me and I cared for her till her last breath. Because of that, no one will hesitate to tell the truth. If my mother is a woman, then my father was a man. It is not that matter we are discussing.  It is women in polics, who goes to decision making positions. 
        Please have some matured wisdom.

    2. SomewayOuttaHere profile image59
      SomewayOuttaHereposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      http://i803.photobucket.com/albums/yy317/mlmvicbc/cheap-drugs.gif

    3. psycheskinner profile image81
      psycheskinnerposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Yea, I'm going to assume your comment is some kind of satire.  Because it is either than you you time travelled here from 100 year ago... which doesn't seem too likely.

    4. Greek One profile image81
      Greek Oneposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Don't forget how their menstrual cycles can interfere with their decision making abilities!

  4. habee profile image90
    habeeposted 6 years ago

    I can't believe you made such a sexist comment!! Women are short tempered? That's almost funny. If that's true, why are men so much more prone to fighting and other forms of aggression? Look at some real statistics before making such a statement.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Now now little lady, calm down.  Have a bon bon.smile

      1. habee profile image90
        habeeposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Ha! See, Ron - this is why I love you!

        1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
          Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          And I love anyone who knows when I'm kidding.

    2. Pcunix profile image89
      Pcunixposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I think the gentleman has made similar comments in the past.  It is probably cultural; my father in law (came over from Italy in the thirties)  had similar disdain for women.

      He may eventually gain more wisdom as he is exposed to more women who do not match his stereotypes.

      1. Daniel Carter profile image91
        Daniel Carterposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Or who woop him upside the head and make him realize women are anyone's equal.

        Duh.

      2. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
        VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        As I said, you have come to a hasty conclusion that I am less wise and need more wisdom.  Any matured person can differentiate between the attitudes of men and women. 

        Women are more security conscious and fear that someone will trespass into their privacy, even if all are engaged in their own work.

        I am place in family and in my society among a lot of women who are very much intelligent, some more intelligent than men. But when they are placed in critical positions, decision making positions, they over-react and spoil the beans.

    3. Ralph Deeds profile image67
      Ralph Deedsposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      "Why are men so much more prone to fighting and other forms of aggression?"

      Testosterone?

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
        Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Getting in touch with their feminine side?

    4. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
      VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      I stand by my comments.  Am I not privileged to comment on women who are my sisters and mothers?  They are all short tempered and come to a wrong conclusion without analysing things...

    5. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
      VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      It is not sexist comment.... It can be gender comment only.  Dont misinterpret.

      1. Elpaso profile image60
        Elpasoposted 6 years ago in reply to this

        I hope you can understand this. There seems to be a language barrier here. Today, in American Society; Women think with a clear head, and act with a sense of Honor and Duty just like Men, here in Modern America; men and women are equal in intellegence and sometimes, in physical strength. This is a different Place and a different Time. I hope you understand and take no offense.

        1. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
          VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          India is not like America.  Here, women are more intelligent than men and lead the family or do their duty with a sense of honour. America is modern to you. But  India is ancient and also modern.  The only thing which differentiate us is that we have not yet tested whether women are equally physically strong.  We shall never test that either.

            I take no offence in anything. This is only a discussing forum.

  5. wildorangeflower profile image57
    wildorangeflowerposted 6 years ago

    I admire Hillary Clinton and she can be a good President, I will wait for that in 2012.

    1. tobey100 profile image61
      tobey100posted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Sadly, you're gonna be disappointed once again.  Hillary's a smart woman.  An excellent politician.  Would probably make a decent President.  She only has one problem.  Her unlikability rating is off the chart based on most polls.  In a nutshell, folks say she's smart, but she's shrew and unlikable.  In politics, image is everything.  Remember Dukakis?  His Presidential aspirations went down the drain just because he climbed into a tank with a helmut on and looked like Beetle Bailey.  Bye bye campaign.  That's just the way it works.  How do you think Obama got elected.  No experience, no background.  Lots of charm and image.

  6. tony0724 profile image59
    tony0724posted 6 years ago

    I just find it Interesting that no one is talking about Marc Mezvinsky who married Chelsea. Marcs Father Ed Mezvinsky was charged with fraud on a " Nigerian Investment Scam ". And he was also convicted and did 5 years. Marc worked for Goldman Sachs and Chelsea now works for a hedgefund with the help of George Soros. The criminals circle the wagons I guess !

    http://www.bbcnewsamerica.com/ed-mezvin … insky.html

    1. Sylvie Strong profile image60
      Sylvie Strongposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Um...what do the purported acts of the father of the husband of hilary's daughter have to do with anything?

      1. tony0724 profile image59
        tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

        Theives hang in bunches. Doyou think it is any accident the American press did not report this ? And also Hillary had to give back some campaign contributions during the campaign as she was caught accepting from one of the guys on the FBIs wanted list. Even the American press ran that one. Think if she wasn't caught she woulda gave back the money ? Not a chance. And I find the apples don't fall far from the tree as both Marc and Chelsea work for hedge funds now.

        1. Sylvie Strong profile image60
          Sylvie Strongposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          It was unreported because it is plainly irrelevant to anything.  What about the father of the father of the man married by the daughter of Hilary Clinton?  The press did not say anything about that guy either.  Clearly more overwhelming evidence of whatever point you are making.  "Thieves hangs in bunches" is not exactly a compelling argument.

          1. tony0724 profile image59
            tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            But nonetheless the truth. And we all know that American press spins by commission and omission. The BBC told the truth. I know the truth obviously does not interest you.

            1. Doug Hughes profile image61
              Doug Hughesposted 6 years ago in reply to this

              What doesn't interest us is the 'friend-of-the-brother-of the-groom was once arrested for peeing behind a bush. Which is not relevent unless perhaps its George W. Bush. And even then not very relevent.

              Guilt by association - done by the right or the left - is cheap gossip.

    2. William R. Wilson profile image61
      William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Tony, you might want to check your source.  My security software gave me a warning about the site.  It purports to be the BBC but is obviously not.  And the writing was definitely not BBC material: 

      "As his fraudulent activities were discovered, he was referred to as a wave of financial crimes."

      Find a better source and I might take your story seriously. 

      Edit:  I dug a little further and it looks like Papa was a little nuts, and yes, he did scam a lot of people out of a lot of money.  Here's an interesting story about what he did:

      http://money.cnn.com/magazines/moneymag … /index.htm

      1. tony0724 profile image59
        tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this
        1. William R. Wilson profile image61
          William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

          Thanks Tony, I also found a link with some info about him and edited it into my first post.

          1. tony0724 profile image59
            tony0724posted 6 years ago in reply to this

            Wow and his kid is a hedge funder ? Scary. Think Hillary knew ? Oh and by the way thank you for the additional info William I am gonna be reading it now !

    3. Friendlyword profile image61
      Friendlywordposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Tony, this is Sins of the father cheap gossip. And, it's not a crime to work for Goodman Sachs. We would all work there if we had a chance. We have a real problem we have to solve right now.

      How are we going to save VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA from the Women of American? He may be off his medication and walking the streets unprotected.

    4. William R. Wilson profile image61
      William R. Wilsonposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      So Tony - you do know that G.W. Bush's granddad, Prescott Bush, was an ardent Nazi supporter and even continued to trade with them after we declared war?

      http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/se … ndworldwar 

      He was also a big supporter of Planned Parenthood.

      1. Jim Hunter profile image60
        Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago in reply to this
  7. Ron Montgomery profile image59
    Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago

    Combining Mr.Mezvinki's criminal past with Hillary's...

    Well let's just call them ethical miscues, I think a lot of watchdogs will be keeping their eyes on the happy couple.

  8. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Hillary and Mr. Mezvinski are a happy couple?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Now yer startin' rumors.

  9. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Not I. I'm not starting any rumors. You are the one who said in the same post:
    "Combining Mr. M's criminal past with Hillary's"
    and "the happy couple"
    What other conclusion could I draw?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      Kidding.  My post obviously meant that Chelsea and what's his face (I don't actually care much about them) were the happy couple.  Not Hillary and that other What's his name (who I also don't give a rat's patootie about).  It's fodder for TMZ and People magazine - not much else.

      It's much more relevant to me that the Chargers are imploding this year.

  10. donotfear profile image91
    donotfearposted 6 years ago

    I must admit that I favored Mrs. Clinton over Obama, hands down.

  11. Arthur Fontes profile image90
    Arthur Fontesposted 6 years ago

    The only thing I can say is "I hope no one accepted cigars from the bride's father."

  12. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    Ha ha! I bet the bride's father and the groom's father did sit down to a nice stogey chat.
    Sometimes a cigar is just a ....

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image59
      Ron Montgomeryposted 6 years ago in reply to this

      And sometimes Lewinsky is just a humidor.

  13. Mighty Mom profile image90
    Mighty Momposted 6 years ago

    How come we never talk about women getting in touch with their masculine side?
    I think that's sexist!

  14. Jim Hunter profile image60
    Jim Hunterposted 6 years ago

    Where do you get your news from exactly.

    I think someones been lying to you.

  15. 61
    clarkpaul111posted 6 years ago

    Hello,

    I m clark paul. My hubby is watching the news, so I can't help but hear it, also.Fox News was banned from either England or the U.K specifically because of their obvious conservative bias. The network is plainly an outlet for Rupert's personal opinions.I m very happy after using this forum.

    Thank You.






    ________________________________
    Want to get-on Google's first page and loads of traffic to your website?
    Hire a SEO Specialist from Ocean Groups  seo pecialist

  16. VENUGOPAL SIVAGNA profile image60
    VENUGOPAL SIVAGNAposted 6 years ago

    The attitude of Ms.Hillary can be viewed with reference to the arguments during her presidential race with MR.Obama. She even cited MR.Kennedy and Lincoln in her speeches.

 
working