- Joined
- Feb 26, 2012
- Messages
- 56,981
- Reaction score
- 27,029
- Location
- Chicago Illinois
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Private
In case you weren't paying attention (obviously).....I was responding to his racist post. Doh!
"never"?
I said nothing of the sort, and you continuing to insist that I did shows that you're simply a blatant, delusional liar.
No, everyone is responsible for his/her own actions. Bill being a horndog and seeking gratification outside the marriage is entirely on him. It's not Hillary's fault whatosever. Having marital problems is a separate issue from infidelity.
So you won't own your posts. Fine with me.
First, don't edit my posts.
Second, I've been married and divorced twice. I know a thing or two about failed marriages, and since you're taking such a silly position, I'm quite comfortable asserting that you apparently don't know squat about it.
Seriously? Two term senator and secretary of state? And don't discount the position of first lady. What are you smoking?
I own everything I said, which resembles nothing of what you accused me of saying. Lying makes baby Jesus cry.
I don't have the ability to edit your posts.
You are an expert in your marriage, your problems, assuming you have any insight into you own behavior. That's where your expertise begins and ends.
Sure you was.....Kinda hard to respond to him when you were talking to another poster about Him. :doh
I don't know why Obama speaks on anything, or Hillary. I can't stand either of them.
I'm asking you, why do YOU think that a president should have any business in education?
I am pretty sure I did not mention Jeb Bush as someone with little or no chance of winning the nomination? At least how it stands yet.
And do you really think that, for example, Rick "liar liar pants on fire" Santorum has a snowballs chance in hell of winning the republican nomination or winning the presidency? I think not.
Everybody can truncate another's post when responding. It's a form of editing. Some call it taking quotes out of context.
You have no idea what I might know about such things.
Rick is just one of all the candidates you ruled out, I mean you ruled out all of them, thus there is no republican nomination. Of course all the Dems have anointed Hillery and you ruled out all the the republicans. That leaves Hillery the anointed one, no further discussion necessary.
You accused me of editing your posts -- another lie. I'm seeing a pattern. If I wish only to respond to a portion of your nonsense, I will do so.
I know for a fact that you have no more insight into the Clintons' marriage than I do.
Well, that's yet another candidate that is vastly more qualified than the clueless old bag the Democrats will put forth.
You accused me of editing your posts -- another lie. I'm seeing a pattern. If I wish only to respond to a portion of your nonsense, I will do so.
I know for a fact that you have no more insight into the Clintons' marriage than I do.
I'm not finished with the second part here. You are claiming that Bill is responsible for his infidelities, and you'll get no disagreement from me on that. You will, however get strong disagreement from me regarding Hillary's role in it.
SNIP
No, Bill is responsible for HIS OWN ACTIONS. It's called personal responsibility. Look into it. The end.
Please tell me why anyone would vote for Hillary? What exactly are her accomplishments, not the titles she has held but the results generated?
I'm not advocating that anyone vote for Hillary. You're barking up the wrong tree here. The election is going to be a competition between which is the worst option, not which is the best.
I cannot see a worse option than Hillary other than another Obama term. Why would anyone vote for her? That is the question that no one can answer especially those who voted for Obama with the resume he had.
What you have to worry about is why anyone would vote for your favored candidate.
You have a very accurate leaning, qualification and results matter little to people like you.
Even if that were true, which it isn't, that has nothing to do with anything I said.
What you said has nothing to do with the content of my post as you made it about me.
I didn't mention you anymore than you mentioned me. You asked me why anyone would vote for Clinton (something I never promoted), and I asked you why anyone would vote for your candidate of choice. Seems to me that we're about done here.
The candidate of my choice will be qualified and with a record to run on, a positive one including not promoting ideas like this one
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?