I'm not here to refute anything you've said. I'm sure in your mind it's 100% spot on. You sound just like a Pats fan. _
(Sigh) Don't do that. Don't go limp. A few million skeezy 20-sumthins are maxing out Discover cards on the Bern, and just dying for a glimmer of hope. Stay strong, man. In the end, the problem is Hillary. Because the world appreciates that, for the Clintons, the Truth is relative and no serious Democrat was/is willing to say it. The only question is: can she get enough people to shrug and say, "Yeah, but still..."
Beyond which, "refute" shouldn't have anything place here. Certain folks might not like it, but the title to the thread is correct. We know that from a court filing. Everything else is just spin class. We pretend is fun, and it kinda is, but it's really just a stupid way to burn calories.
An assumption wrapped in an assumption? ...ah, the irony... : ) I want transparency, period. Of course not, you weren't Secretary of State. . But to be so quick as to give Clinton an across-the-board pass because she wasn't some IT geek?.....this after already having served in the United States Senate?......that anyone with two brain cells let alone a shread/a sense of professional discretion (read: competence) wouldn't know better? . Whatever IT-lacking skills she may or may not have, that is a flimsy nail on which to hang one's 'objective, non-partisan' hat on. . Again, we're talking about a former Secretary of State not some Goober out of an Aamco commercial: "Gee, I awways wanted to werk on a Germin transmishheeon!" For the sake of argument, let's say Condoleezza Rice is in the same boat: you wouldn't be looking at her with a jaundiced eye?
I think what Juan Williams said pretty much is my point. No surprise you think it a given that "the world" feels a certain way. The way you feel. It doesn't. As for Sanders, he's a different subject. But yes, I think he's a problem.
As most know here I have abysmal on ignore. He resents this very much. I assumed from your comment you did not hurt yourself, so since the page said there was a message from him, you must have quoted him. So, you once again want to pursue your slimy way of insulting me without engaging in a debate on the merits. Fine. You ain't got shit, stokes. And you know it.
it calls into question her judgment. Like maybe its not the greatest. And I just voted for her a scant three days ago and I can acknowledge this.
According to former Secretary Powell, Ms. Rice did have emails on the server of her top aids that were classified after the fact. And Powell had some on his server. Next!
I also question her judgment. As I said above. But she is not guilty until proven innocent to the satisfaction of all the reactionary jackasses on this thread that she broke the law and should go to jail. If there was a better candidate who had better judgment, that would be great. There isn't one.
I'm not here to debate you. It's not a debate for me but obviously you really care to defend Hillary, which is fine. And this is an Internet message board, when a poster posts something I find funny or stupid or brilliant or racist or nonsensical or illiterate or cool, I'll say so. But none so seriously enough that you should feel compelled to call me slimy. That's hurtful. _
Btw, I don't keep track of who has whom on Ignore. It's not that important to me and if anyone thinks someone else knows who has who on ignore, they think too highly of themselves. Besides, Ignore is a pussy cop out. I think Brad is the only poster that has me on Ignore. Which feels right. _
Good. I've never put anyone on Ignore. soxx, junc, Barcs, pcl, Genobots, Tebots, that "religious kid" (to quote Petro), Roger Vick--and an assortment of jerkoff stalkers that couldn't stand me yet I stood tall. In a manner of speaking. Can't let the terrorists win. _
Looking in the wrongggg place schmo. Of all people you should know this. You must be insufferable to get a beer with.
Perhaps you took what I meant to say you're slimy. I didn't say that. I just said you ain't got shit. And that you posted an insult in a slimy way. Are you really slimy?
I think anyone who thinks too hard about why someone else would have someone on ignore, and cares to call it a pussy copout, is very much in keeping with someone who ain't got shit. I put people on ignore who I am convinced do not post anything worth reading. What's the matter with that? Nice slimy way to call me a name, though. Faker.
Btw I think having the cynic pose here is a pussy copout. Not calling anyone in particular names here, of course. Just a general observation.
