Thursday, March 31, 2016

More on The Clinton Rules of Journalism

Applejack: Why do YOU suppose that news report you shared called it ''sabotage'' when the party treated BOTH campaigns the same?

I know why. -- It's ''The Clinton Rules of Journalism.''

Say any goddamned thing you want as long as it's about the Clintons or as long as it damages a Clinton, or as long as it helps a Clinton opponent.

Wednesday, March 30, 2016

Trump for Presidency?

Trump says women should be punished for having an abortion; the USSC should investigate the former Sec. of State; and women should be treated like shit.

And some in this chat room plan to support his bid for the presidency.

Un-fucking-believable.

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Bernie and Martha's Vineyard

''What's a ''corporate owned candidate''? ''



One that attends lavish parties on Martha's Vineyard to hit up Wall Street fat cats for money?

''A lavish Martha’s Vineyard Democratic fundraiser that Bernie Sanders attended . . . featured lobbyists for many of the industries he now rails against on the presidential campaign trail, according to a guest list obtained by MSNBC.''

Other guests were ''professional lobbyists, corporate executives, trade association heads, labor union brass and wealthy individual donors...,'' lobbyists from ''corporations such as the financial firms Blackrock and Prudential Financial, or the defense contractor Raytheon . . . DLA Piper, Patton Boggs, and Akin Gump . . . Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, Wal-Mart, Chevron, ExxonMobil and . . . petrochemical and pipeline companies as well as Stanford Financial, the now defunct financial firm felled by an alleged Ponzi scheme. . . the private equity firm Blackstone Group as well as those who have represented pipeline company Kinder Morgan, the American Petroleum Institute, pharmaceutical giants such as Merck and Allergan (now involved in a controversial inversion deal), and the pharmaceutical trade association, among others.''

Damn! What's that old saying about ''glass houses''? - - http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/sanders-campaign-finance-purity-not-always-possible



A CNN report on Bernie's prolific fund-raising from Wall Street fat cats describes Sanders as ''always present''

I know; I know. You're thinking, ''Bernie was there to dress down these fat cat donors; right?''

Wrong: ''I don't recall him ever giving a speech attacking us . . . his remarks were always in the mainstream of what you hear from senators.'' - http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/05/politics/sanders-democratic-fundraisers/ 


And there is more at  http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/3/3/bernie-sanders-phony-revolution-sellout 

"I’ve been a political activist and observer all of my adult life, and I’m hardly naïve about the methods and deals politicians employ to win elections. What I have a problem with is the sanctimonious purist who holds everyone else up to his or her own standards and who sells himself or herself as a champion of the disadvantaged or the victimized yet violates those self-imposed standards and moral code time after time. Senator Bernie Sanders may pound the podium and raise his voice to inspire a political and economic revolution across America, but he certainly lacks the courage to bring a revolution to his own political universe. Senator Sanders willingly, if not eagerly, abandons his message for political gain over and over again, the very criticism he self-righteously hurls at other politicians. When his political ambitions repeatedly conflicted with his beliefs and ethics, he chose what was politically advantageous. Bernie Sanders hides behind the guise of a revolutionary while he holds his hand out to high rollers and betrays the very people he purports to champion.  His supporters may try to defend his actions, but the rest of us see you, Bernie." - JoPat Wellman, "Peoples View" - March 4, 2016 - http://www.thepeoplesview.net/main/2016/3/3/bernie-sanders-phony-revolution-sellout 

Thursday, March 24, 2016

Ignore Is for Pussies

1221 PM: Zajak -- Thu, Jan 13 7:20pm PST
Zajak
liberal solution. when they can't find an answer that makes sence they resort to the iggy box. LOL wonderful

Nixon, Mao, and Castro

Yes, Nixon visited Cuba too. 


Nixon and Mao


Bush and Putin

Links from Smirking Chimp

Blogs


News & Commentary


Radio & TV

The Case for Hillary

We know from experience that when we "closely examine the attacks on Hillary, whether they come from the left or the right, they break apart under scrutiny. That is, if you’re so inclined to scrutinize. Scant few are. Many, however, are steadfastly unwilling to view Clinton through anything other than the most severe and cynical lens. If one bit of evidence against her breaks down under examination, then another must be found. If that one fails to pan out, there’s always some other way to interpret her record that satisfies the harsh narrative we’ve chosen for her." - https://medium.com/@zacharyleven/the-case-for-hillary-3564233d524f#.k6p5uo80m

Doss Scares Wing Nuts

Natchez and Dosset -- chat nightmares!


Sunday, March 20, 2016

Trump on Women

From Cosmopolitan Magazine:


"There's no shortage of sexist, insulting remarks Donald Trump has uttered about women during his roughly four decades of public life. And a new ad presents them in a powerful way: by having real women read the disgusting things he's said about women. A couple highlights (or, really, lowlights): 
  • "A person who is flat-chested is very hard to be a 10."
  • "I like kids. I mean, I won't do anything to take care of them; I'll supply funds, and she'll take care of the kids."
  • "Women, you have to treat them like shit."

http://www.cosmopolitan.com/politics/news/a55247/women-read-trump-quotes-about-women-ad/

And, yes, he really DID say that in an interview: 


https://books.google.com/books?id=BeUCAAAAMBAJ&pg=PA41&lpg=PA43&dq=%22Marie+Brenner%22+trump+wine&source=bl&ots=tX3bn4ql8h&sig=o3lsFRig7dxSOfw6N79Zavz9izU&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0CB4Q6AEwAGoVChMI-8nc39aZxwIVx5INCh1EuwLj#v=onepage&q=shit&f=false


 _______________________________


Unsoma: Yes, it IS worth repeating. It's a sure fire way to identify the assholes and/or chickenshits.

If they agree with Trump that women should be treated like shit, then they're assholes.

If they won't say they disagree, then they're chickenshits.
 
It's a GREAT test that really works.

Friday, March 18, 2016

Government Tyranny

If we allow the govt to FORCE women to have babies, what's next?

The govt forcing us to become Muslims?

The govt forcing us to become libertarians?

The govt forcing us to observe Lent?

The govt forcing us into homosexual marriage?

Forcing us to learn Spanish?

No, thank you.  Unlike the rightwingers, I just don't WANT to give the govt these powers. 


____________________

You can't claim to be pro-anything other than pro-tyranny if you favor giving the govt the power to FORCE women to have babies. 

TjBob Promises

Tejano Bob . . . . Line number 6383 . . . . Sat, May 26,
8:17PM PDT


I'm not going to argue with you further about it, dosseet.
In five business days I will fulfill my promise to repost your comment that you
and your buddies at the VFW call people like POL INC assholes. If you choose to
claim it's a fabricated post, that's up to you.


Thursday, March 17, 2016

What People Are Thinking?

4986   PM:   Celeste   [Quote]     -- 9:38pm -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Celeste
Trump has the guts to say what most people have been thinking.

Celeste and Allegations

4946   PM:   Celeste   [Quote]     -- 9:30pm -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Celeste
Veritas: Accusations doesn't make it true.
<HR>Exactly what we've been telling the Clinton-bashers for over 20 years.


Celeste: So you look at past immigration in order to put today's immigration into perspective.

And you also should look at past false allegations about presidents, first ladies, and candidates in order to put today's false allegations into perspective. 

Trump Is an Embarrassment


Trump DOES rant. Trump DOES promote hatred, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, and racism; and he IS an embarrassment to this nation.

Dino

Dino: I remember in school the really dumb students tried to hide from the teacher during class discussions. They'd slump down in their seats; put a book up in front of their face; pull up their collar; lean this way and that hoping to avoid eye contact with the teacher.

That's what you guys are like.

One big difference --- in class, they got called on and made either to answer up or go to the principal's office.

Here, you guys get called on; refuse to answer; then hurl insults at the person calling on you.


Evasive Chatters --- Refusing to Answer

3071   PM:   Christians   [Quote]     -- 1:29pm -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Christians are Good
 . . .  Yes, I have some answers. But no, I don't intend to share them.<HR>Oh, my!  How does that square with what you were saying earlier?

1991 PM: Christians [Quote] --8:01am --Fri, Oct 24, 08 pst
Christians are Good
Evasive chatters make for boring chatters

3599 PM: Christians [Quote] --8:20am --Thu, May 8, 08 pst
Christians are Good
There is no excuse for not answering a question.

Misspeaking v Lying

 2499   PM:   Vagne   [Quote]     -- 9:37am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Vagne
 . . . Hillary doesn't lie, just miss speaks....hahaha

<B>You mean like HERE?  Where you misquote Bill Clinton? You mean you're not really lying; you're just miss-speaking?</B>

2534 PM: Vagne [Quote] -- 9:45am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Vagne
''I did not have sex with that woman, Ms Lewenski''. You OK with that ?



<B>Later, Vagne admits that his original claim about Clinton was a misstatement.</B>

2571 PM: Vagne [Quote] -- 9:51am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Vagne
''I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewenski''. I was wrong..sexual relations, not sex.


2531 PM: Veritas [Quote] -- 9:45am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
 . . . then you see what will happen if people accuse Hillary of lying - the response will be, ''So you won't be supporting any of the GOP candidates, OK, thanks.''<HR>|
KABOOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |


Vagne: Either you ''misspoke'' here (Okay - I admit, you typed it.) OR , you're lying. Which is it. Clinton didn't say this.

2534 PM: Vagne [Quote] -- 9:45am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Vagne
''I did not have sex with that woman, Ms Lewenski''. You OK with that ?


2549   PM:   Doss   [Quote]     -- 9:47am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
doss
Weed: Is it okay for Vagne to misquote Clinton; and then claim that Clinton lied?





2557   PM:   Doss   [Quote]     -- 9:48am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
doss
BTW -- as far as we know, Clinton told the truth about Lewinsky -- but that's beside the point.

The point is, Vagne MISQUOTED Clinton RIGHT AFTER castigating Hillary for a misstatement she made.



2558   PM:   Doss   [Quote]     -- 9:49am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
doss

Weed: So, it's okay for Vagne to misquote Clinton; then accuse Clinton of lying?

2571 PM: Vagne [Quote] -- 9:51am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Vagne
''I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Ms. Lewenski''. I was
wrong..sexual relations, not sex.<HR>
So, like Hillary, you misspeak now and then.

Glad we got that settled.

_______________________________________

Vagne: But in your FIRST stab at smearing Bill Clinton, you misquoted him.

Now, the question is --- did you LIE? Or did you ''misspeak''?

 =======================

 2654   PM:   Weedhopper   [Quote]     -- 10:10am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
[quoting doss] "Is it wrong to misquote someone and then accuse that person of lying?"

Yes, Doss, it's wrong when you do it, too...there, does that make you feel better?

=========================
 2654   PM:   Weedhopper   [Quote]     -- 10:10am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
[quoting doss] "Is it wrong to misquote someone and then accuse that person of lying?"

Yes, Doss, it's wrong  .  .   .  there, does that make you feel better?
______________________



Weed: I take it that when you say, ''Yes, it's wrong....,'' you really mean it IS wrong. 
------------------------------------

CaG Stands Up for Hillary!

CaG really didnt' mean to stand up for Hillary this way.  Later he will deny it. *S*

2291   PM:   Christians   [Quote]     -- 8:18am -- Thu, Mar 17, 16 pst
Christians are Good
It isn't fair to accuse someone who hasn't done anything of having done or it having intentions to do it, IMO.

The Biden Rule

Editing out what Biden said doesn't erase it from the public record. No matter HOW MANY TIMES you guys take his earlier statements out of context, we will remind you of the greater context. He WELCOMED BUSH's nomination should a vacancy happen. You can't make it disappear. *S*


There is, of course, no such thing as "The Biden Rule," except maybe this statement that he  welcomes the president's nomination.

"I believe that so long as the public continues to split its confidence between the branches, compromise is the responsible course both for the White House and for the Senate. <U><B>Therefore I stand by my position, Mr. President. If the President consults and cooperates with the Senate or moderates his selections absent consultation, then his nominees may enjoy my support as did Justices Kennedy and Souter</U></B>." [C-SPAN, 2/22/16]

Wednesday, March 16, 2016

Cattle Futures? Forget It!

"While Clinton's account was wildly successful to an outsider, it was small compared to what others were making in the cattle futures market in the 1978-79 period."

Hillary Was Right, Of Course

Veritas: Let's see how US involvement in Libya was reported by the media BEFORE Hillary stared winning primary races.

"The Libyans were emotional because the U.S. and its allies had toppled leader Moammar Kadafi in a military campaign that averted a feared slaughter of Kadafi's foes. Obama administration officials called the international effort, accomplished with no Western casualties, a "model intervention." [Los Angeles Times, 6/27/14] (underline added by doss)


"A group of U.S. diplomats arrived in Libya three years ago to a memorable reception: a throng of cheering men and women who pressed in on the startled group "just to touch us and thank us," recalled Susan Rice, President Obama's national security advisor.

The Libyans were emotional because the U.S. and its allies had toppled leader Moammar Kadafi in a military campaign that averted a feared slaughter of Kadafi's foes. Obama administration officials called the international effort, accomplished with no Western casualties, a "model intervention." [Los Angeles Times, 6/27/14]"

Tuesday, March 15, 2016

CaG and Namecalling

5309 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 7:22pm -- Sun, Jul 26, 15 pst
Christians are Good

. . . I just don't like insults which are destructive and meant to
ridicule

=====

2806 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 9:55am -- Tue, Mar 1, 16 pst

Christians are Good

I would appreciate more civility and manners in politics. I would
appreciate more civility in this chat room.

=====

5243 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 12:17pm -- Fri, Sep 25, 15 pst

Christians are Good

Schoolyard name-calling is their game.

=====

7220 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 12:39pm -- Tue, Aug 18, 15 pst

Christians are Good

Don't start up with the name calling unless you want me to terminate
conversation with you.

Trap for Dudley

Laying a trap?

I suppose from Dudley's perspective, it might seem like a trap.

Yes, I can see that. If he answers me, then he's opening the door to a conversation about the issues.

If he gets into a conversation about issues (as opposed to hurling insults at his opponents), thinking readers will quickly see that Dudley's views aren't defensible; and mine are.

Monday, March 14, 2016

Lucy, Charlie Brown, Hillary, and the GOP

This is what they remind me of.


Why Zajak Likes Trump

9478 PM: Zajak [Quote] -- 9:49pm -- Mon, Mar 14, 16 pst
Zajak
He could instruct that bimbo he hangs out with run naked thru the WH corridors and that might
take the edge off the do nothing Republicans and all caring Democrats.

9480 PM: Doss [Quote] -- 9:50pm -- Mon, Mar 14, 16 pst
doss
Zajak: Is this why you support Trump?

9482 PM: Zajak [Quote] -- 9:50pm -- Mon, Mar 14, 16 pst
Zajak
she has big t-ts and a abundance of rear end > might be just what this failed nation needs

CaG and Insults


5309 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 7:22pm -- Sun, Jul 26, 15 pst
Christians are Good
. . . I just don't like insults which are destructive and meant to
ridicule
 


2806 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 9:55am -- Tue, Mar 1, 16
pst
Christians are Good
I would appreciate more civility and manners in politics. I would
appreciate more civility in this chat room.

 
5243 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 12:17pm -- Fri, Sep 25, 15
pst
Christians are Good
Schoolyard name-calling is their game.

 
7220 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 12:39pm -- Tue, Aug 18, 15
pst
Christians are Good
Don't start up with the name calling unless you want me to terminate
conversation with you.

Bernie, Hillary, and "I Don't Know Where He Was"

I made a remark like that once.  I said, "I don't know where John was when I moved from faculty row to the country."

Then he reminded me. He showed me a picture someone took back then. A bunch of friends posed in front of the old house for one more picture; just after we'd loaded the truck and were about to pull away.

I had forgotten about him skipping out on all the hard work and just coming by to have his picture taken.

An honest mistake.

Opinions, Defending Opinions, and Dodging Questions

I invite anyone who wishes to ask me about my views to go ahead and ask me. If I have an opinion, I'll share it. If you ask me WHY I embrace that opinion, I'll tell you.

What I won't do is say you're an idiot for asking me; or that your question is ''pointless'' (if it truly is a question about my political views). Nor will I simply dodge the question like Zajak, Pale, CaG, Dino, and many of the others do.

Sunday, March 13, 2016

MSNBC Hates Clinton

"The Clinton campaign is very nervous about Ohio; they're very nervous about Missouri, which looks an awful lot like Oklahoma to them. . . and they're even thinking North Carolina's going to be close."  - Chuck Todd - MSNBC  - Sunday - Meet the Press (March 13, 2016)

Part D Penalty

Kaslin: If it's wrong for people to be fined under Obamacare, why is it okay for seniors on fixed incomes to be fined under Bush's Part D ?

Kaslin is NOT going to say; nor will any other right winger.

Saturday, March 12, 2016

"It Could Happen!"

Pale: This reminds me of the fantasy your pals trumpet --- that Hillary is about to be indicted.

When we inject reality into the conversation, you guys respond with something like ''Well, it COULD happen even yet.''


506 PM: Palerider [Quote] -- 8:22pm -- Sat, Mar 12, 16 pst
Palerider
Pradeep looking for love, still. Sometimes reminds me of my Downs niece,
she believes she'll one day be the girl friend of a pro wrestler named
Cena, something like that. If you try to insert a dose of reality she'll
defiantly respond with ''it could happen''

Welcome!

We are delighted you are visiting our website. We offer a variety of insurance products and services to individuals and families. Whether it's final expenses (life insurance), individual or family health insurance (under 65), filling the Medicare "gap," or covering nursing or at-home long term care, one of our licensed professionals can assist you in choosing the right product especially for you.

We also offer health insurance designed for college students, and for others (under 65) who need temporary health insurance coverage.

Agency principal, Randal Byrd, welcomes your comments
  • Phone:  713-663-7275 
  • Cell:  713-540-7275 
  • Fax: 281-254-7921

Friday, March 11, 2016

CaG and Racism

What's surprising is that CaG let his anger get the best of him. We suspected all along that his hatred of Obama had to do with skin color. But then, when blacks flocked to the polls in support of Hillary, it was too much for CaG; the resentment surfaced and spilled over. He can't help it. That's the way racists are.

220 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 8:34pm -- Sat, Feb 27, 16 pst
Christians are Good
Low turnout and heavily weighted toward blacks.

135 PM: Christians [Quote] -- 8:24pm -- Sat, Feb 27, 16 pst
Christians are Good
Some 61 percent of the SC turnout was black. No surprise Hillary defeated a nice (white) old man.

Thursday, March 10, 2016

Clinton Broke No Law

Jason Reed, of Reuters, sets the record straight. Receiving or sending emails that were not classified at the time is perfectly legal.

"Clinton, Powell and Rice’s aides didn’t break the law regarding the handling of information that wasn’t deemed classified at the time it was sent."

http://www.newsweek.com/colin-powell-emails-hillary-clinton-424187

Reed goes on to explain:

"The shocking truth about the last two Republican secretaries of state has finally come out: Colin Powell and aides to Condoleezza Rice trafficked in classified information on their personal email accounts. This is an enormous scandal!

Oh, wait. No, it’s not.

This news involving Powell and Rice is meaningless except that it sets up a rational conversation (finally) about the Hillary Clinton bogus “email-gate” imbroglio. Perhaps the partisans on each side will now be more willing to listen to the facts. From the beginning, the “scandal” about Clinton using a personal email account when she was secretary of state—including the finding that a few documents on it were retroactively deemed classified—has been a big nothing-burger perpetuated for partisan purposes, with reports spooned out by Republicans attempting to deceive or acting out of ignorance. Conservative commentators have raged, presidential candidates have fallen over themselves in apoplectic babbling, and some politicians have proclaimed that Clinton should be in jail for mishandling classified information. The nonsense has been never-ending, and attempts to cut through the fog of duplicity have been fruitless. "
More - from Jason Reed of Reuters:

So, DID Hillary, "Powell and the aides to Rice violate rules governing classified information, since the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) staff has recently determined that some of their years-old personal emails contain top-secret material? No. The rules regarding the handling of classified information apply to communications designated as secret at that time ."






Most Admired Woman in the World

 "Clinton Most Admired Woman for Record 20th Time
by Jeffrey M. Jones

PRINCETON, N.J. -- Americans again name Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama the woman and man living anywhere in the world they admire most. Both win by wide margins over the next-closest finishers, Malala Yousafzai for women and Pope Francis and Donald Trump for men.''



http://www.gallup.com/poll/187922/clinton-admired-woman-record-20th-time.aspx




Questions Questions Questions

CaG: I've answered about 10 of your questions in a row.

Now it's your turn.

What if the FBI discovers that Trump, Kasich, Cruz, and Rubio all had a hand in murdering Vince Foster?

Rules or No Rules?

Reminds me of once when some of the older boys broke up a fight I was in and said, ''Let's settle it in the ring.''

So, they made us put on boxing gloves and we began to fight.....the older boys acted as referee; breaking us up when we got in a clutch, etc.....

Then, my opponent tripped me and pounced on me while I was down.

The older boys then shouted ''NO RULES!!!!!''

So, I rolled the guy over; pinned him down with my knees. Took off my glove and used my bare knuckles to smash his face like a pumpkin.

Suddenly, they wanted to bring back the rules. 


_____________________________

Doss's challenge

Take up any political topic; you choose.

I'll either agree with you or disagree.

Here are the rules:

1) First one to refuse to answer a question loses.

2) First one to go personal loses.

3) First one to name-call loses.

4) First one to resort to a logical fallacy loses.
 

Doss Isn't Afraid of Questions

Veritas:  Did you think for a second that Richweb was going to post about his political views and invite us to scrutinize those views critically?

BTW -- I support unions, Democrats, teachers, voting rights, civil rights, marriage equality, environmental stewardship, universal healthcare, public funding of JOBS to rebuild our nation's infrastructure; and helping assimilate undocumented immigrants into full citizenship.

|AND| I invite anyone here to critically examine my views and question me on them.

Dino Flips Out

6648 PM: Dino [Quote] -- 4:49am -- Thu, Mar 10, 16 pst
Dino

Only shiny consumer product The General has is that classy dildo he shoves up his ass!

 
4901 PM: Dino [Quote] -- 4:54pm -- Sun, Jul 19, 15 pst
Dino
. . . go suck your dildo...


4051 PM: Toy911 [Quote] -- 4:42am -- Mon, Feb 1, 16 pst
Toy 911
Dino: whats wrong with you?

Wednesday, March 9, 2016

Why Oppose Republicans?

Republicans do things like attack voting rights; attack the rights of women to control their own bodies; hand over environmental protection to corporate interests who don't mind dumping carcinogens in the drinking water or upping the arsenic levels in our water; attack rights of workers to unionize; wish to strip poor sick people of their health insurance; raise taxes on the middle class in order to pay for tax cuts for the wealthy --- and the list goes on.

Tuesday, March 8, 2016

What Did We Learn Tonight?

The importance of Michigan and MS is that they have helped Hillary to EXPAND her lead over Sanders.

Even the Clinton-hating talking heads at MSNBC have resolved themselves to the notion that she's going to be the nominee. If there were ANY WAY they could think of to get around it, they would.

But they can't think of any way --- so they talk of her nomination now as if it's a foregone conclusion.

Let the Attacks Begin

2092 PM: Doss [Quote] -- 8:11pm -- Tue, Mar 8, 16 pst
doss
Now that it's clear that Hillary EXPANDS her lead, I'm instructing the Hillary haters and the lying liars to begin hurling your personal insults at me.

2033   PM:   Devious   [Quote]     -- 8:02pm -- Tue, Mar 8, 16 pst
. . . Bernie's now on a roll and he's going to continue to be on a roll as more and more people find out who what he is about....Time is on Bernie's side

"I put Sherrod Brown now, front of the list, front of the line, as potential running made for her." -- MSNBC's Chuck Todd -- 10:01pm Central  --  Agreeing with Devious that it's all over for Hillary.....

No -- wait, he said HER.....clearly, he expects Hillary to continue expanding her lead over Sanders.

2093   PM:   Doss   [Quote]     -- 8:12pm -- Tue, Mar 8, 16 pst
doss

Of the Hillary campaign, ''That's a fact; they're going to win the night in delegates; no doubt about it.'' -- MSNBC's Chuck Todd  - - - 10:10pm Central  3/8/2016

"I put Sherrod Brown now, front of the list, front of the line, as potential running made for her." -- MSNBC's Chuck Todd -- 10:15pm Central  

Sexist Pig

1745 PM: Roostercogburn [Quote] -- 6:05pm -- Tue, Mar 8, 16 pst
Roostercogburn
sanders beating the sow in Michigan ,what's not to like?

Thunder Shirt for Dogs

How to fit your dog's thundershirt.
 

TjBob Flips Out

Think about it. How HARD did I have to bitch-slap TJBob to make him this nuts?  *S*

Tejano Bob . . . . Line number 6383 . . . . Sat, May 26, 8:17PM PDT
I'm not going to argue with you further about it, dosseet. In five business days I will fulfill my promise to repost your comment that you and your buddies at the VFW call people like POL INC assholes. If you choose to claim it's a fabricated post, that's up to you.

Tejano Bob . . . . Line number 1125 . . . . Thu, Jun 31, 10:48PM PDT
Read this slowly and carefully, dosset ..... I am not going to back my claim that you called people up at the VFW ''assholes''. . .

Excuse Me - I'm Talking

Hillary is winning!

OIG - Hillary's Emails -- Non-Scandal


Office of Inspector General U.S. Department of State
Broadcasting Board of Governors
UNCLASSIFIED

March 2, 2016

MEMORANDUM FOR UNDER SECRETARY KENNEDY FROM : OIG - Steve A Linick £ SUBJECT: FINAL : CLASSIFIED MATERIAL DISCOVERED IN UNCLASSIFIED ARCHIVAL MATERIAL (ESP-16-02)

The Office of Inspector General 's (OIG) Office of Evaluation and Special Projects is currently examining issues associated with records preservation and the use of personal hardware and software by five Secretaries of State (Albright, Powell, Rice, Clinton, and Kerry) and their immediate staff. This memorandum updates the memorandum OIG sent on February 3, 2016, to include the Department 's response to OIG's recommendations and our reply. Attachment A contains the Department 's official response, dated February 18 ,2016 .

During the course of this evaluation, OIG searched unclassified archives and discovered records suggesting instances in which potentially sensitive material may have been transmitted via personal email accounts or other unclassified means to Secretary Powell or to Secretary Rice's immediate staff . None of the material was marked as classified, but the substance of the material and "NODIS" (No Distribution) references in the body or subject lines of so me of the documents suggested that the documents could be potentially sensitive. On October 19 , 2015 , OIG transmitted to the Department and separately to the Inspector General for the Intelligence Community (ICIG) for classification review 19 separate Office of the Secretary archival documents. The date range of the documents is from February 2003 through June 2008.

On December 15, 2015, the ICIG advised OIG that, according to information management officials in the Intelligence Community (IC), none of the documents contain or contained IC information.

On December 29, 2015, the Department advised OIG that 12 of the 19 documents contain national security information classified at the Secret or Confidential levels based on a re view by 9 Department bureaus and offices. Two of these documents were emails sent to Secretary Powell's personal email account; the remaining were documents transmitted to personal or unclassified accounts belonging to a member of Secretary Rice's immediate staff a nd another senior Department official.


U.S. Department of State, Office of Inspector General, Washing t on, D.C. 20522 - 0308 I UNCLASSIFIED I On January 15, 2016, the Department provided Ia second response that discusses OIG's query whether the material contained in each classifi~d document was or should have been regarded as classified at the time of transmission or receipt. Based on the Department's responses and findings to date, additional potential classified material and/or highly sensitive information not intended for distribution may reside in the Department's unclassified paper and electronic archives associated with Secretaries Powell and Rice and their respective staff. Recommendation OIG recommends that the Department remove classified material from all unclassified paper and electronic archives associated with Secretaries owell and Rice and their staff. Management Response Office of the Executive Secretariat (S/ES) staff h ve removed from the Department's unclassified network all of the email material identified as cl~ssified and placed it in secure storage. Additionally, retired electronic records provided to the Bureau of Administration that were initially stored in an unclassified system have b~en moved to the appropriate classified system. With regard to paper records relating to forme{ Secretaries Powell and Rice, the Department does not believe any action is warranted because these materials are currently stored in a facility certified to house classified Department record~ up to the SECRET level. According to OIG's follow-up conversations with S/ES staff, additioral electronic archival material associated with Secretaries Powell and Rice is being stored in a jsecure manner. OIG Reply OIG considers this recommendation to be resolved. This recommendation will be closed when OIG receives and accepts documentation detailing the secure methods that S/ES is using to store the additional electronic archival material I associated with Secretaries Powell and Rice. In addition, OIG strongly encourages the Depart"lent to consider conducting a review of all paper and electronic archives for the Office of the Seoretary to determine (1) the extent to which classified material may have been inappropriatJiy transmitted through unclassified email accounts and (2) whether additional action is nkeded to safeguard this material. cc : D(MR)- Heather A. Higginbottom DS - Gregory B. Starr A- Joyce A. Barr I. Charles McCullough, ill, Inspector General, Intelligence Community UNCLASSIFIED 12 United States Department of State Under Secretary of Stale for Ma11agemefll Washington, D . C. 20 5 20 UNCLASSIFIED TO: Steve Linick, In spector General FROM : M - Patr ick F. Ke nn edy ~~ February 1 8, 2016 SUBJECT : R es ponse to OIG Memorandum dated 2 -3- 2016, Classified Material Di scovered in Unclassified Archival Material (ESP-16 - 02) We t hank the OIG for the opponunity to respond to its recent memorandum and va lu e the OIG's care ful review of the records prese r vat i on i ssues . The Department has th e f ollo wing response t o th e recommendation co nta i n e d in the memorandum . Recommendation : OIG recommends that the Department remove classified material from all un classified paper a n d electronic archives associated wit h Secretaries Powell and Rice a nd their staff. Response: The Departm ent accepts th e principle that a ll classified material must be safeguarde d pursu ant to national security stan d ards. The Dep anment follows c u rrent securit y guide lin es relating to the storage of classified nation a l security information , and we bel i eve th at those guidelines protect the info r mation that yo u reviewed. Regarding e l ectro nic r eco rds of fo rm e r Secretaries, it is the current pr act ic e of th e Exec u t ive Se cretariat staff (S / ES- IRM) to s to re unclassified e-mail files (pst fil es) on t h e unclassified ve rsion of POEMS. Since the receipt o f yo u r memorandum, the S / ES staff has moved quickly to remove a ll e -mail material you identified as classified from the unclassified network and place them in secure sto r age. Addit i onally retired elect r onic records provided to the Bur eau of Adminis tr ation that were stored in an unclassified sys t em have been moved to th e appropr i ate c l ass ifi ed system. For the paper reco r d s re l at in g to former Secretaries Powell and Rice, we do not believe any removal of classified materials is wa rr anted. Retired papers records from former Secretaries Powell a nd Rice are currently stored in the Depa1tmem's UNCLASS IFIED II UNCLASSIFIED R.ecolds Center (SA-13). '{his tacility certified to house Department records up to the SECRET level. I ~,~ If you have any further questions about this response, feel free to reach out to John Hackett, Director, A/GIS/IPS. II il Attachment : Classified Material Discovered in ~nclassified 1 Archival Material (ESP-16-02) Memorandum I II !1 I lj II i II i I I I i I i I I I I I I I I I I I UNcJskiFIED I I

9-11? No, It Wasn't on Clinton's Watch

This pretty much sums it up.

Pale: So, in conclusion --- Clinton went after the terrorists, and you guys HATED him for it.

Then, after Bush ignored the terror warnings, and we got hit, you guys BLAMED Clinton for Bush's being a fuck-off.

Sunday, March 6, 2016

Hillary Blamed for Bill Sanders Voted For

Interesting the way the press frames the questions.

Hillary is asked of the 1994 Crime Bill, ''Given what's happened since 1994, why should black people trust you to get it right this time?''


Wow! Here is a bill that was passed BEFORE Hillary was elected to the Senate; and she's blamed for it, to the point that NOW there is a question as to whether she should be trusted because of the passage of this bill she supported but did NOT vote for.

Which of the candidates' trustworthiness should be questioned now? The one who was in the congress and who VOTED FOR it in 1994? (Sanders)

Or the one who was NOT in the congress and did NOT vote for it? (Hillary)

Hell, you know the answer to this one; it's easy.

HILLARY should be held responsible for the bill Sanders voted FOR!

__________________________________________


Hillary, noting the double standard, challenged Lemon to ask Sanders the same question he asked of her.

And, no. Lemon did no DARE ask Sanders the same question.  Lemon revised  the question for Bernie. In Bernie's case, his vote FOR the bill does NOT give rise to a question of his trustworthiness; in Bernie's case, if HE got it wrong, it was just a "mistake." Aw, shucks, Bernie --- if you got it wrong then -- that's okay. We all make mistakes. So we won't impugn YOUR trustworthiness now.

But for that bitch Hillary?  Hell no! In HER case it's a matter of trustworthiness; no simple mistake for her; no, this cuts RIGHT to the heart of her character and clearly demonstrates she can't be trusted.


By the way; not only did Lemon softball Bernie on the question, and relieve him of any freighted questions of trust, he also let Bernie get away with not even answering. Unlike Hillary, Sanders would NOT say that his support of the bill was a  mistake.

________________________________


Hillary, noting the double standard, challenged Lemon to ask Sanders the same question he asked of her.

Do you think Lemon had the balls to ask it?

Hell no. And blow a perfectly good smear? 


https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/06/the-democrats-debate-in-flint-mich-annotated/



From the Democratic presidential debate last night, there emerged a tale of two candidates and how they are questioned. Or one might say -- a glaring set of double standards:

At issue? - A piece of legislation from the 1990's --- now regarded unfavorably by many.

One candidate is asked if voting for the bill was a "mistake." You know - the tone of the question was sort of "Aw shucks, these things happen; we understand. Don't sweat it."

The OTHER candidate, who did NOT vote for the bill (but supported it), is asked not merely if that support was "a mistake,"  but rather was asked why should voters " trust you to get it right this time?"

That's right. For the one who actually VOTED FOR the bill, it was perhaps just a "mistake."

The one who did NOT vote for the bill, though, faced an ominously laden question about character and trustworthiness. None of this "Aw shucks" stuff for THIS candidate. No sirree, Bob.

NOW --- your mission -- should you choose to accept it -- is to try to figure out:

WHICH of the candidates is a woman?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/06/the-democrats-debate-in-flint-mich-annotated/

_____________________________


Dino: Did you get a kick out of Hillary challenging Don Lemon to ask Bernie the same question Lemon asked her?

Whether you got a kick out of it or not, did you notice that Lemon didn't DARE ask Bernie what he asked Hillary?

___________________________________


Here's how the ''pro-Hillary MSM'' works.

There is a bill passed in 1994; it's now quite unpopular among many voters.

Bernie voted FOR the bill; Hillary didn't vote for it, but she DID support it.

So, today, the ''pro-Hillary MSM'' attacks Hillary as possibly being untrustworthy for supporting the bill.

But for Bernie, he's asked simply was it a mistake to support the bill.

I've asked several times for an explanation as to why in her case it's a question of trusting her; but with Bernie, it's just maybe a simple ''mistake'' he made.

Most people I ask about this either dodge the question; change the subject; or claim that the question is ''pointless.''

A few have noted the simple truth -- it's the Clinton Rules ---- she's held to a tougher standard than EVERYONE else. 


Stage Mother



Reagan needed Nancy to whisper his lines to him.



From the Milwauke Sentinal - Sept. 26, 1987

https://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1368&dat=19870926&id=gKtRAAAAIBAJ&sjid=6RIEAAAAIBAJ&pg=4930,5745798&hl=en


HIllary Pushes Bernie to the Left

In 2007 Hillary proposed expanding to everyone who wanted it an option to enroll in public health insurance (Think "Medicare for All") .  Today, Sanders supporters tout his call for Medicare for all, and forget Hillary was working on making public health insurance accessible back when Bernie was till in the House.

http://www.pnhp.org/news/2007/september/hillary_clintons_a.php

Saturday, March 5, 2016

Go Union!



You know that when even a brain dead wing nut sees the benefit of unions, the unions must be doing SOMETHING right.
 
5099   PM:   Mrsdeluxe   [Quote]     -- 7:46am -- Sat, Mar 5, 16 pst
Mary
I'm a member of the MEA

5117   PM:   Mrsdeluxe   [Quote]     -- 7:52am -- Sat, Mar 5, 16 pst
Mary
I suppose. If they didn't offer me something I valued, I wouldn't maintain a membership. Michigan is a ''right to work'' state now.

How Is the Obama Economy?

How Is the Obama Economy? Let's ask some right wingers!

 
<B>5084 PM: Dwightvol [Quote] -- 7:43am -- Sat, Mar 5, 16 pst
Dwightvol
Here's a shocker for you. My family business as you call it just about doubled it's income in 3 yrs..

5609 PM: Dino [Quote] -- 1:51pm -- Fri, Apr 24, 15 pst
Dino
Wished I were young and making the money I make now.

5611 PM: Mwjohnson [Quote] -- 1:52pm -- Fri, Apr 24, 15 pst
Mwjohnson
GOOM...I am making more money than I ever have.

715 PM: Sunnybelle [Quote] -- 6:14am -- Sun, May 3, 15 pst
Sunnybelle
I'm making more money than ever my friend . . .</B>

Friday, March 4, 2016

Immunity, Hillary, and Media Hysteria

Any good lawyer is going to say 'I want immunity before I talk,'" said Barbara Van Gelder, a Washington lawyer with the firm Cozen O'Connor, who has represented numerous witnesses in high-profile congressional and Justice Department investigations. "Just because someone gets immunity isn't indicative of guilt. It's just protection." [The New York Times3/3/16]

http://mediamatters.org/research/2016/03/04/network-evening-news-programs-ignore-crucial-fa/209013

Why Leave the US if Hillary Is Elected?

Leave the USA if Hillary is elected? Hell, they'd be nuts!

1) Things will continue to improve.

2) She really MEANS it when she says it's time for ''more loving kindness'' in this nation.

3) She's very likely to expand on the marvelous progress President Obama has made with health care insurance reform.

4) Other nations' respect for the US will grow as this country turns its back on the hate and divisiveness offered up by the GOP.

IG Referral and Wrongdoing

"An important distinction is that the IC IG did not make a criminal referral - it was a security referral made for counterintelligence purposes . The IC IG is statutorily required to refer potential compromises of national security information to the appropriate IC security officials."

- Note - no suggestion of any wrong-doing; merely the "potential compromises" of information.

To illustrate -- wrongdoing would be knowingly and intentionally sharing classified information like Petraeus did. Compromise would be something along the lines of having a password that's too easy to hack; which is not "wrong doing" and certainly isn't criminal.

https://oig.state.gov/system/files/statement_of_the_icig_and_oig_regarding_review_of_clintons_emails_july_24_2015.pdf

____________________________

Notice I answer Pale's questions; but he won't answer mine.

Do you have any idea why the IG issued a statement spelling out that it was not a criminal




Immunity

What the Hillary haters are forgetting is that Pagliano HAD to be granted immunity before giving information to investigators; to do otherwise would be to waive his right to refuse giving information to the Dowdy Committee.

If Gowdy found out he was talking to the FBI, then it could haul him back before HIS committee and demand he talk --- or face contempt charges.

It's just good lawyering. 



http://www.forbes.com/sites/charlestiefer/2016/03/02/immunity-for-bryan-pagliano-will-help-end-the-hillary-clinton-email-inquiry/#11d76d46552d

Trump and RICO

"Trump, plaintiff Art Cohen accuses him of “a pattern of racketeering activity” under 18 U.S. Code § 1962, the notorious RICO statute, normally deployed against the Mafia and other organized-crime syndicates."

Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/432328/donald-trump-trump-university-lawsuits-are-headed-court

Addressing Income Inequality

Start by taxing the wealthy at the same rates we did during the boom of the 60s.

Secondly, make it EASIER, not harder, for workers to unionize.

Thirdly, use higher taxes on the wealthy to pay for job training and education.

Fourthly, use higher taxes on the wealthy to invest in our infrastructure; and give those jobs to UNION contractors.

Wednesday, March 2, 2016

Glass Steagall

According to Larry Womack, former Associate Editor of Huffington Post, Bernie Sanders has been pushing around what he calls a "bizarre narrative" in which he "repeatedly insinuated, implied and said flat-out that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (which Bernie calls the repeal of  Glass-Steagall) is what prompted the Great Recession. Womack writes:

"Senator Sanders, that simply isn't true. That is a lie invented for a slimy attack ad during the 2008 campaign. There is an overwhelming consensus--not from Wall Street, but from watchdogs and academics -- that the repeal of Glass-Steagall did not cause the financial crisis. Fact checker after fact checker after fact checker after fact checker has found the claim to be, at best, an enormous stretch. They were doing so, from all parts of the political spectrum, years before you launched a presidential campaign.

The law had little if anything to do with the practices leading up to the crisis. It aimed, as you well know, to separate commercial from investment banking. You can support that policy or oppose it, with honest, pro-regulatory arguments on either side. I might even agree with you. But you cannot with a straight face blame the financial crisis on its absence."  - https://berniesanders.com/yes-glass-steagall-matters-here-are-5-reasons-why/







According to  Princeton's Alan S Blinder: 

"I often pose the following question to critics who claim that repealing Glass-Steagall was a major cause of the financial crisis: What disasters would have been averted if Glass-Steagall was still on the books?

I've yet to hear a good answer. While mortgage underwriting standards were disgraceful, they were promulgated by banks and mortgage finance companies and did not rely on any new GLB powers. The dodgy MBS were put together and marketed mainly by free-standing investment banks, not by newly created banking-securities conglomerates. All five of the giant investment banks (Goldman Sachs, Merrill Lynch, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers, and Bear Stearns) got themselves into severe trouble without help from banking subsidiaries, and their problems certainly did not stem from conventional investment banking activities--the historic target of Glass-Steagall. Similarly, Wachovia and Washington Mutual died (and Bank of America and Citigroup nearly did) of banking diseases, not from entanglements with or losses imposed on them by related investment banks. In short, I don't see how this crisis would have been any milder if GLB had never passed."  - http://www.ijcb.org/journal/ijcb10q4a13.pdf

Signing off on Glass-Steagal

967 PM: Namvet [Quote] -- 4:45pm -- Wed, Mar 2, 16 pst
namvet . . .
and the truth is, bill clinton's years were those of unprecendented growth, peace and prosperity. so i can forgive his many sins. including sighing off glass steagal

The Anti-Obama

The GOP AGREED after the 2012 loss to Obama that it needed to do comprehensive immigration reform.

That is a moderate to conservative stance that they had a chance of getting Democrats to go along with. One of today's GOP candidates (Rubio) was a bold leader in trying to bring about reform; and worked with Obama and others to try to make it happen.

But, the prevailing attitude among the GOP was whatever Obama is for, they have to be against, even if what he's for is what THEY'RE for! And they WERE FOR comprehensive immigration reform; but because of this crazy anti-Obama madness, they flipped.  It's insane.

Now they're beating Rubio over the head for trying to do what the RNC RECOMMENDED the GOP do following their 2012 loss in the election.

It's sick.

GOP Cut State Dept Security

Don't blame Hillary for GOP cutting her security budget.

''Investigators looking for lessons from the fatal terrorist attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi might want to start on Capitol Hill, where Congress slashed spending on diplomatic security and U.S. embassy construction over the past two years.

Since 2010, Congress cut $296 million from the State Department’s spending request for embassy security and construction, with additional cuts in other State Department security accounts, according to an analysis by a former appropriations committee staffer.''  - http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/sep/27/benghazi-attack-followed-deep-cuts-in-state-depart/?page=all

McConnell: "I Don't Remember Saying That -- To All of You"

Who does McConnell think he's fooling?

Asked about his alleged statement that he's ready to drop Trump like a hot rock, McConnell's only response was, ''I don't remember saying anything like that to all of you.''

Okay --- unpack that --- he said it and doesn't remember it?

He said it but didn't say it ''to all of you''?

Or he didn't say it.

Which do YOU think it is? Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

Tuesday, March 1, 2016

Trump? A Winner?

Why do some say Trump is a winner?

Take Down Hillary

"The national media has never been more primed to take down Hillary Clinton," Politico's Dylan Byers observed  . . . , as he surveyed the unfolding campaign season.  The same press corps, he added, stands poised to "elevate a Republican candidate." -

But Byers isn't the only one. "More and more journalists are simply admitting the truth: The press is out to get Clinton. Period."

  • New York Times: "Clinton's Toughest Foe Appears to Be the News Media - http://theweek.com/articles/542750/mainstream-mediahates-hillary-clinton-should-make-nicewith-theliberal-media
  • The Week: "The mainstream media hates Hillary Clinton." - http://theweek.com/articles/542750/mainstream-mediahates-hillary-clinton-should-make-nicewith-theliberal-media
  • Philadelphia Inquirer: [Quoting MSNBC's Chris Matthews]  "I hate her. I hate her. All that she stands for." - http://mediamatters.org/research/2008/01/11/media-matters-by-jamison-foser/142137
  • Politico: "[T]he national media have never been more primed to take down Hillary Clinton (and, by the same token, elevate a Republican candidate)."- http://www.politico.com/blogs/media/2015/05/hillary-clintons-election-to-lose-206766
  • NBC's Chuck Todd: "No matter what she says, she's not going to please Republicans and many members of the political press corps."
That's a rather astonishing revelation from inside the Beltway media bubble, right? Openly taking down a Democrat, while elevating a Republican? Wow.
The weird part was that campaign journalists didn't seem to object to the description. There was very little pushback regarding Byer's rather shocking claim; it barely caused a ripple. Journalists don't seem ashamed of that fact that Clinton faces a tougher press than her fellow candidates, or think it reflects poorly on the state of political journalism. More and more journalists are simply admitting the truth: The press is out to get Clinton. Period.





    Hillary, African-Americans, Loyalty and the Nomination

    Hillary Clinton's ''constituency begins with African-Americans . . . they have absolutely given her this nomination . . . it's a STIRRING achievement!''

    MSNBC's Chris Matthews who also is reported to have said of Hillary, ''I HATE HER! I HATE HER! And everything she stands for!''

    Why Hasn't Hillary Been Arrested?

    CaG accidentally explains why Hillary hasn't been arrested.

    6377   PM:   Christians   [Quote]     -- 7:14pm -- Tue, Mar 1, 16 pst
    Christians are Good
    If people don't break a law, there are no arrests.

    Bosnia, Hillary, Bush, Reagan, and the Guard

    From Media Matters:   http://mediamatters.org/blog/2015/02/11/conservative-media-weaponize-brian-williams-sus/202486


    Moreover, in seeking to use Williams' story for partisan benefit, conservatives are ignoring numerous Republican politicians who have embellished their stories of military service to burnish their political careers, dating back to Sen. Joe McCarthy's self-aggrandized war record. As Joe Conason noted in a 2010 piece on how "mythmaking is indeed characteristic of the politicians most revered by the GOP," both Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush greatly exaggerated their service:
    Take George W. Bush, whose controversial service as a Texas Air National Guard pilot was shrouded in mystery, evidently because he wanted to conceal the basic facts of his privileged admission to the TANG and his strange departure from its ranks. In his 2000 campaign autobiography, ghosted by Karen Hughes, Bush claimed that after completing his training in the F-102 fighter plane, "I continued flying with my unit for the next several years." That simple sentence was entirely untrue, according to records eventually released by the Bush campaign, which showed that he had never flown in uniform again after his suspension from active duty in August 1972 for failing to show up for a mandatory physical examination. 

    In the same book Bush also suggests that he tried to volunteer for service in Vietnam "to relieve active duty pilots" fighting the war. But, of course, the entire purpose of his privileged (and questionable) enlistment in the TANG was to avoid the Vietnam draft, as he hinted in a 1998 newspaper interview when he said: "I don't want to play like I was somebody out there marching [to war] when I wasn't. It was either Canada or the service and I was headed into the service." Two years later, under the tutelage of Hughes, that momentary candor evaporated.

    Yet Bush's self-serving revisions cannot compare with the fantastic recollections of the late Ronald Reagan, whose veneration by Republicans was never diminished by his bizarre utterances. In November 1983, he told Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir during a White House visit that while serving in the U. S. Army film corps, his unit had shot footage of the Nazi concentration camps as they were liberated. He repeated the same tale to Nazi hunter Simon Wiesenthal and other witnesses. Reagan had indeed served in the Army and worked on morale-boosting movies for the War Department. But he had done so without ever leaving Hollywood for the entire duration of the war.

    Classified NOW?

    CaG will go back and "disappear" this admission that the emails were NOT classified when they were sent to Hillary.   *S*


    4301   PM:   Christians   [Quote]     -- 1:12pm -- Tue, Mar 1, 16 pst
    Christians are Good
    ''Hillary Clinton’s private email server contained |now-classified information . . . |