Does anyone believe Hillary is honest?

[Redfish]

Those in public office or still in the news have every word scutinized, thus more contradictions exposed. I use the terms "self serving" & "half truths" often instead of "lies". Pointing out every contradiction by any one in the public service* isn't useful nor likely to lead to genuine dicussion. Thus, Hillary Clinton makes self serving statements, yes.

*Service can be good, bad, or mediocre of course.

How about when she patronized blacks in a black church with her fake black accent?

"ah ain't now ways tarred" "Ah've come too faa"

Hillary Clinton is an old, lying, devious bitch. The worst possible choice for POTUS.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Those in public office or still in the news have every word scutinized, thus more contradictions exposed. I use the terms "self serving" & "half truths" often instead of "lies". Pointing out every contradiction by any one in the public service* isn't useful nor likely to lead to genuine dicussion. Thus, Hillary Clinton makes self serving statements, yes.

*Service can be good, bad, or mediocre of course.

How about when she patronized blacks in a black church with her fake black accent?

"ah ain't now ways tarred" "Ah've come too faa"

Hillary Clinton is an old, lying, devious bitch. The worst possible choice for POTUS.

So you'll be voting for Magic Underpants again instead of the woman soon to be President?

 

[bendog]

Those in public office or still in the news have every word scutinized, thus more contradictions exposed. I use the terms "self serving" & "half truths" often instead of "lies". Pointing out every contradiction by any one in the public service* isn't useful nor likely to lead to genuine dicussion. Thus, Hillary Clinton makes self serving statements, yes.

*Service can be good, bad, or mediocre of course.

How about when she patronized blacks in a black church with her fake black accent?

"ah ain't now ways tarred" "Ah've come too faa"

Hillary Clinton is an old, lying, devious bitch. The worst possible choice for POTUS.

So you'll be voting for Magic Underpants again instead of the woman soon to be President?

My money's on Randian Paul to win the nomination. He literally can multiple positions on any issue simultaneously, and that's probably what it'll take to get through the gop primaries.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

How about when she patronized blacks in a black church with her fake black accent?

"ah ain't now ways tarred" "Ah've come too faa"

Hillary Clinton is an old, lying, devious bitch. The worst possible choice for POTUS.

So you'll be voting for Magic Underpants again instead of the woman soon to be President?

My money's on Randian Paul to win the nomination.

Not a chance in hell...

 

[bendog]

yeah, I don't think Adelson's fooled. Of course Mitt showed how twisted you have to be to wrap around the neolibertarians and Zionists.

 

[The Rabbi]

I read the article and the transcript. She never said anything about "guiding principles". You have done what USMB nutters ( and unfortunately, much of our media) often do. You read a headline that was misleading and ran with it.

Hillary Clinton is a hawk. She isn't going to signal appreciation for a less than aggressive foreign policy position.

The problem that you have is that you are too lazy to actually read a long, wonky piece in The Atlantic. You'd rather get your info from the front page of the NY Post. You ought to know what you are talking about before you make claims. It will lead to better discussions here.

“Great nations need organizing principles, and ‘don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle,” Clinton told the Atlantic’s Jeffrey Goldberg, also a Bloomberg View columnist, in reference to the way Obama and his aides describe his approach to foreign policy.

Hillary Clinton Faults Obama for ?Stupid Stuff? Policy - Bloomberg

So was she telling the truth or lying when she said that, you dishonest piece of monkey crap? How do you know?

Wait? Did she say he doesn't have any "guiding principles"? Nope.

She was responding to a prompt.....mid discussion.....to comment on how Obama says he will not do stupid shit when it comes to foreign policy. She doesn't think that those words reflect Obama's entire foreign policy doctrine. She was not saying that they do. You need to read the entire passage

And you STILL HAVE NOT READ THE ARTICLE NOR THE TRANSCRIPT OF THE INTERVIEW.

By the way....that Bloomberg headline is misleading. She never faulted Obama for stupid stuff. Try harder.

Deflection, spin. It's all you've got. You backed yourself into a corner with your stupid comment and now can't get out.
Was she telling the truth or lying? How do you know?

 

[bendog]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...lybeast/politics+(The+Daily+Beast+-+Politics)

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

 

[The Rabbi]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

So How Hawkish Is Hillary Clinton? - The Daily Beast

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

What she said was great nations have broad policies and dont' do stupid shit is not a broad policy. Since that seems to be the only broad policy of the Obama Administration (anyone care to chime in with others?), she is saying Obama does not have broad policies.
Now, was she lying when she said that, or telling the truth?How do you know?

 

[LoneLaugher]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

So How Hawkish Is Hillary Clinton? - The Daily Beast

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

What she said was great nations have broad policies and dont' do stupid shit is not a broad policy. Since that seems to be the only broad policy of the Obama Administration (anyone care to chime in with others?), she is saying Obama does not have broad policies.
Now, was she lying when she said that, or telling the truth?How do you know?

Still trying, huh? Now it is "broad policies". We've abandoned "guiding principles", I see.

For someone who presents himself as a "politico".....you sure do approach the comments of certain politicians with naivete. Its politics, dummy. she was saying many things.......and here you are acting like a dumb-ass who doesn't get that politicians obfuscate and stretch and play word games.

Try harder.

 

[bendog]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

So How Hawkish Is Hillary Clinton? - The Daily Beast

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

What she said was great nations have broad policies and dont' do stupid shit is not a broad policy. Since that seems to be the only broad policy of the Obama Administration (anyone care to chime in with others?), she is saying Obama does not have broad policies.
Now, was she lying when she said that, or telling the truth?How do you know?

Well, I accurately predicted you'd bitch. Of course you'd bitch over a 16 perfect rib eye. She never said "broad policies" so stop lying.

 

[bendog]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

So How Hawkish Is Hillary Clinton? - The Daily Beast

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

What she said was great nations have broad policies and dont' do stupid shit is not a broad policy. Since that seems to be the only broad policy of the Obama Administration (anyone care to chime in with others?), she is saying Obama does not have broad policies.
Now, was she lying when she said that, or telling the truth?How do you know?

Still trying, huh? Now it is "broad policies". We've abandoned "guiding principles", I see.

For someone who presents himself as a "politico".....you sure do approach the comments of certain politicians with naivete. Its politics, dummy. she was saying many things.......and here you are acting like a dumb-ass who doesn't get that politicians obfuscate and stretch and play word games.

Try harder.

Rabbis' a partisan. He'll never be satisfied. Note he avoids any mention of avoiding BushII fckups. Obama is like all US politicians in that he believes in self-determination of all people. So did BushII, but he fcket that up beyond all recognition.

But, Hill is right to the extent she's saying that you have to base for policy on more that mistake avoidance. Other countries have to see that there's a bright line of what you believe, and most importantly in what actions you will not tolerate.

 

[mudwhistle]

Just like O, she never has accomplished anything.

Indeed. All she's ever done is shift her positioning to be in tune with the temporal emotions of her "base".

Hillary Clinton’s recent efforts to distance herself from President Obama’s foreign policy may be generating a lot of attention, but nothing she is now saying about foreign policy will matter in the future.

If history has taught us anything, especially when it comes to foreign policy, it’s that Clinton doesn’t have positions — she has positioning.

When she wanted to appear tough on national security in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, Clinton happily voted in favor of authorizing President George W. Bush to launch a war against Iraq. But once opinion of the war turned sour – especially within the Democratic Party – Clinton positioned herself as a long-time critic of the war. And she would have gotten away with it, if it weren’t for a young Illinois senator....

Nothing Hillary Clinton is now saying about foreign policy matters | WashingtonExaminer.com

Thank God for honest Abe......

 

[bendog]

Rove simply out maneuvered the dems on Iraq. So long as Saddam prevented inspections, there was little choice. So, all those dems voted for force. But, of course, Bushii's reasons for invasion had nothing to do with womd.

But what worries me about her waffling is her thin skin. Reagan waffled. JFK waffled. But they could also laugh at themselves and even do a bit of self-effacement. Even BushI laughed at his own lacl of "the vision thing" and Dana Carvey's impersonation. Carter and Obama have thin skins.

 

[Jarhead]

Rove simply out maneuvered the dems on Iraq. So long as Saddam prevented inspections, there was little choice. So, all those dems voted for force. But, of course, Bushii's reasons for invasion had nothing to do with womd.

But what worries me about her waffling is her thin skin. Reagan waffled. JFK waffled. But they could also laugh at themselves and even do a bit of self-effacement. Even BushI laughed at his own lacl of "the vision thing" and Dana Carvey's impersonation. Carter and Obama have thin skins.

Sure. Of course. It is fact.

 

[sealybobo]

Brett Stephens nails it perfectly in this AM's WSJ on Hillary.
Bret Stephens: The Hillary Metamorphosis - WSJ

First he mentions how she admitted her opposition to Bush's IRaq Surge was merely political, and she knew it would work all along. Then he nails her for a recent interview in which she recanted virtually everything she said as Sec.State.
So who is the real Hillary? I'd say the real Hillary is the one who will do anything to get elected and is totally without principle or scruple. And this is the shoe-in for the Democrat Party?

Compared to every Republican in the US government she is the most honest person in politics.

 

[Jarhead]

Dodging bullets
Dead broke
Had no idea Stevns asked for more security.

No. I do not find her honest.

 

[Jarhead]

Brett Stephens nails it perfectly in this AM's WSJ on Hillary.
Bret Stephens: The Hillary Metamorphosis - WSJ

First he mentions how she admitted her opposition to Bush's IRaq Surge was merely political, and she knew it would work all along. Then he nails her for a recent interview in which she recanted virtually everything she said as Sec.State.
So who is the real Hillary? I'd say the real Hillary is the one who will do anything to get elected and is totally without principle or scruple. And this is the shoe-in for the Democrat Party?

Compared to every Republican in the US government she is the most honest person in politics.

I believe many republican politicians lie.
I believe many democratic politicians lie

You believe ALL republicans lie.

Sounds like you are what many refer to as a sheeple.

 

[The Rabbi]

She said "don't do stupid shit" is not a policy that will reach good results. Realizing nothing will satisfy Rabbi, but really one cannot disagree with that statement. But does Hill really think Obama's entire for policy is based on that? Probably not. She's waffling. She's backing away from positions she held while SOS on Iran and Iraq. Possibly for political reasons, but possibly she's more "let Bibi have whatever land he wants" and "no nuke power for Iran" that she could push while in Obama's cabinet.

So How Hawkish Is Hillary Clinton? - The Daily Beast

She's avoiding certain failures of her own. But despite those criticisms, I think its true that Obama's rise in 2008 was he was not going to pull BushII's. The criticism of Obama is that he'll draw one line in the sand after another. That's what's happening in the Ukraine. Putin keeps sneaking up to see if he can get across the latest line. For all of Slick's own avoidance of entanglements, he certainly told Putin where to stick Serbia. Slick could make a decision. Obama tends to dither. I suspect Hill is closer to Slick on that.

What she said was great nations have broad policies and dont' do stupid shit is not a broad policy. Since that seems to be the only broad policy of the Obama Administration (anyone care to chime in with others?), she is saying Obama does not have broad policies.
Now, was she lying when she said that, or telling the truth?How do you know?

Well, I accurately predicted you'd bitch. Of course you'd bitch over a 16 perfect rib eye. She never said "broad policies" so stop lying.

Please explain the difference between "organizing principles" and "broad principles." Hint: There arent any.
So now we've established she said the Obama Administration has no organizing principles, do you think she was being honest when she said that, or not?

Or are you going to deflect to another sophism?

 

[The T]

HELL FUCKING NO. LIAR through and through.

 

[Kosh]

Does anyone believe Hillary is honest?

I do not believe any politician is 100% honest ever.