Return to the Hot Topics Forum | Post a Follow-Up

 o
Clinton's Interviewd

Posted by chase z6 (My Page) on
Thu, Sep 26, 13 at 13:52

Anyone catch the Piers Morgan interview with the Clintons?

I was very impressed with Chelsea, smart, funny, did I say smart? I have a notion that the Clintons just may be the next American dynasty.

Can you imagine, being the daughter of two Presidents ;) who also becomes President?

Chelsea has her Dad's personality and her Mom's smarts......you go girl!


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Equal opportunity grammar check: Should be "Clintons Interviewed"; no need to apostrophe to make something plural.

:)

I look forward to Hilary becoming President in 2016.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Wouldn't it be "plural" if both Chelsea and Bill were interviewed?

~Ann


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

esh I got it right in the body of the post........does that count?

Had I left the "d" off my misspelled "interviewed" I would have passed muster.....


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

You could claim that the "d" was the typo and therefore the apostrophe was appropriate. But you already admitted to the misspelling of "interviewed" so you're out of luck on that one! :-)

I did not see the interview. Does Chelsea have political ambitions?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Just what we need. The wife of a billionaire hedge fund manager. Don't y'all loathe the 1%, or does the last name and political party soothe that for y'all?

Besides, her father in law remains on federal probation and still owes almost $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.

And would Heri approve of a Jew as First Man? Gosh. Lots to consider.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

I don't believe in political dynasties, no matter what party. We need fresh ideas, new blood, not stagnation in this country.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

When in doubt, use "trickery"... Piers Morgan interviews the Clintons; the Clintons interviewed by Piers Morgan; Piers Morgan's Clinton interview.

Something I've seen multiple times over multiple posts has been bothering me - and this is only meant to be helpful, and not a snark. Garments worn as body coverings are clothes; cloths are woven, knitted, whatever fabrics used to make clothes or coverings or assorted useful items.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Besides, her father in law remains on federal probation and still owes almost $9.4 million in restitution to his victims.

What does that have to do with Chelsea? She isn't responsible for her father-in-law and what he has done has no bearing on her.

And would Heri approve of a Jew as First Man? Gosh. Lots to consider.

Interesting that you even went there and many of the places you did in your post. Apparently it is something you have throught about yourself. Also interesting that you just singled out Heri since there are others on this board who have agreed with some of his posts although they align themselves with conservative thinking on other issues.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Why do non-liberals assume that liberals hate rich people? No matter how many times many people try to explain it, it's just ignored. You know there are plenty of rich liberals. I even personally know a few.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Sounds like you really liked the interview Chase. Cool for them! I hope Chelsea can do as much as Caroline Kennedy has done in her lifetime (Caroline is one of my favorite people in the world. Looks like we may all get a closer look at her soon).

Hillary, although a mostly fantastic Sec of State, is unlikley to ever reach president. Not enough people will vote for her because of several reasons. Any republication who views Benghazi as poorly executed, White Water, or the idiots who believe a woman can't do the job... there are just too many factors. It's a reach. It'll take too many from the republican side to get her over to majority.

Obama had that going for him. If you remember, you may not, it's what gets my ire up. People seem to forget it takes more than just the democrats to vote a candidate into office. It took some cooler heads and some more middle of the road to vote for him. The voter turnout in both 2008 and 2012 were higher than they'd been for the previous three election cycles. And yet, he won. Not just blacks. Not just women. Not just democrats. It took some from the "other side" to get him over the top and it will her. She can't get them. She didn't even get all of her party to endorse her for candiate.

I'm trying to be objective about something very emotional so please take it for what it is worth!


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

"Any republication who views Benghazi as poorly executed, White Water, or the idiots who believe a woman can't do the job... there are just too many factors. It's a reach. It'll take too many from the republican side to get her over to majority."

We don't need Republicans for Hillary to win. I don't know of a single Republican who voted for Obama. Not one. Democrats and a fair number of Independents will do the job. The idiots who believe a woman can't do the job are predominantly older men. To which party do they belong?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Yes red, you do. I'm not sure how you think people get elected, but unless every democrat turns out, not likely/or way fewer republicans turnout, not likely, she needs that contingent of both republicans and independents who are on the fence. Regardless, she wasn't even the party's candiate before. If she doesn't have that, how can she carry the entire country? I'm sorry, but not only older men think women can't do the job. Infuriating as it is, there are way more people than that. Men, women, young, old... reality. If not, why do you think women still don't earn the same as men peers? Why hasn't ERA passed? It won't either. Sad! Wrong! Many things, but reality.

I'm answering with objectivity and you're using only emotions. Step back. Find the obstacles and overcome them if you want it to change.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

I believe there are some female Republicans that would vote for Hilary largely because they believe that it's time to move women forward ... and recognizing that, for the most part, both parties are about the same once they get into office!

And there will probably be some male Democrats that won't vote for her ... because she's a woman.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

overcome them if you want it to change

I find it hard to overcome other's misogeny. Kind of like trying to overcome bigotry, racism, anti-antisemitism. The younger generation is growing up with lots more tolerance. The greater majority of them are Democrats.

That is not emotion, it is fact.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

I know at least one Republican who voted for Obama. She is now 80 and voted for him in 2008 and 2012 and so did her daughter (I assumed her daughter was also a Republican or she wouldn't have mentioned her). Said she'd voted Republican all her life, but this is not the Republican party she supported. I have talked with or communicated with others who have said they were Republicans but voted for Obama but can't remember specifics as it was just said in passing.

So, there are a few out there.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

My question is - should Hillary run, who on the GOP side can stop her?

Seems a pretty weak bunch on the bench. Rubio, Cruz, Christie, Jeb Bush (speaking of dynasties), Condi Rice, Ryan?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

so did I both times dock. And I more often relate to republican candiates (NOT teaparty). There are a lot of us. I really think this Barak Obama supporting NON-teaparty group was a good chunk of the vote. I wouldn't doubt it.

My son is more staunchly republican than I am red!!!! I have to temper his view down a couple of notches sometimes. While he's very gender-impartial (he grew up with playing with dolls as much as he did playing baseball), and he is a part of this younger generation, he's not alone--not all of the young ones are democrats??? (what? why say this?) Gender equality is coming about and getting better, but is in no way there. When equal pay happens, we're there. It takes more than being democrat to get a vote. The party didn't do it on its own the last two times and won't any other time. It takes something more. Someone more.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Who could beat Hillary? Condi Rice hands down!

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

The Condi Rice who "owns" Iraq? Who promised weapons of mass destruction? That Condi Rice? And you think 4 people who died in Benghazi will be a problem?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

The only thing I remember about Condi is "We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

There would be a bumper sticker in there somewhere.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

That and Condi doesn't want her private life looked into, I believe, so I don't expect she will run.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Long ago I heard her say she had no interest in running, but would if drafted by the party. Does that seem likely (a draft) for someone who doesn't appear to have any appetite for the rigors of political campaigning?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Condi knew the intelligence said planes would fly into buildings but "we just didn't believe it". Plus if she's a lesbian, that won't fly with the teabaggers.

Chelsea is a bright young woman ,and what does her father in law have to do with anything?

Hillary has a great chance to be elected. Women , gays, minorities, anyone who isn't part of the wacko crowd will vote for her. Besides, after watching Bill on Letterman in his intelligent introspective conversation , I said to husband...I will love having him back in the WH as first dude.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Nothing but class on the left.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Since the PDB of August 6, 2001 has been declassified, Condi Rice will have to do some pretty fast talking to explain her testimony on advance warnings of attacks.

BEN-VENISTE: Isn't it a fact, Dr. Rice, that the Aug. 6 P.D.B. warned against possible attacks in this country? [...]

RICE: You said did it not warn of attacks. It did not warn of attacks inside the United States. It was historical information based on old reporting. There was no new threat information. And it did not, in fact, warn of any coming attacks inside the United States.

And then there's the reality:

Declassified and Approved for Release, 10 April 2004

Bin Ladin Determined to Strike in US

- Nevertheless, FBI information since that time indicates patterns of suspicious activity in this country consistent with preparations for hijackings or other types of attacks, including recent surveillance of federal buildings in New York.

The FBI is conducting approximately 70 full field investigations throughout the US that it considers Bin Ladin-related. CIA and the FBI are investigating a call to our Embassy in the UAE in May saying that a group of Bin Ladin supporters was in the US planning attacks with explosives.

The National Security Archive: The President's Daily Brief


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Nothing but class on the left.

That's exact same term that TPers were happily using to describe themselves when the Tea Party was first formed.

We've discussed this topic so many times that it now deserves its own numbering system -- #8.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Show me where nancy?


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Nancy is right. Many times in the beginning the TPers called themselves teabaggers. I personalty had no idea of any sexual meaning to the word when I first used it. But I have such disdain for them, I'll continue to use it. It's not against the law ,since they call themselves that term. Although I do like Joe's better...teacreatures.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Show me where nancy?

Just few of a number of discussions: 2009 - Teabaggers are Punked

From 2011 - teabagger - defined in urban dictionary


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

I wasn't talking about HT discussions and neither were you. You must have found out that the term teabagger was first used on MSNBC by Shuster. It is a disgusting term and that very thread that you linked to made it known that it was very early on.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

You must have found out that the term teabagger was first used on MSNBC by Shuster. It is a disgusting term and that very thread that you linked to made it known that it was very early on.

And all you had to do was Google to find out the correct imformation., Nancy was correct. They used the term themselves not Shuster nor was he the first to use the term to mock them.

There are several meanings. Perhaps they should have looked it up before opening themselves up for ridicule.

Even Breitbart has a video posted from 2010 by Nussbaum "I am Proud to be a Tea Bagger"

'Teabagger' Finalist For Oxford's 'Word Of The Year'

"Teabagger" is a finalist for the New Oxford American Dictionary's "word of the year."

Oxford gave a statement to Mediaite to clarify that they meant the political "teabagger," not anything salacious:

It should be noted that the term "teabagger" appears on Oxford's list because of the usage cited on that list, not because of any other meaning. Citations for the political sense were found in a number of legitimate sources throughout the year. As a reference to members of the currently active Tea Party, the word has been used in speech and print by both liberals and conservatives. In this context, the term "teabagger" is a reasonably conceived informal name for an affiliate of the Tea Party, and as a word in the news, it earned a mention for the year 2009.

Having deliberated carefully over the word-usage evidence, Oxford's lexicographers are confident in their judgment that "teabagger" the political term stands distinctly apart from "teabagger" the vulgar term.

Keith Olbermann took credit for popularizing the word on MSNBC Tuesday night. But the word "teabagger" actually started to spread after the Washington Independent's David Weigel photographed a protester at the first D.C. Tea Party Protest in February holding the sign, "Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You!!"

"When I took that photograph at the first Tea Party in D.C., I thought it was funny," Weigel said. "I did not think it would play any role in defining a political movement. And while I personally don't use that word to refer to anti-Obama protesters, I am in very proud possession of a 'Proud to Be A Teabagger' button, so I guess the term has gone through the Lenny Bruce, adopt-it-against-our-enemies wringer."

There is more info on the net if you want to learn more.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

I wasn't talking about HT discussions and neither were you

Really?

Then why did I write this:

We've discussed this topic so many times that it now deserves its own numbering system -- #8.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

The term was used long before the Tea Party ever came into existence. And not as a derogatory term for tea party members who did not exist.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Not sure what circles you travel in but I surely never heard that term used before the tea party folk coined it.


 o
RE: Clinton's Interviewd

Give it up already, K. You lost!!


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: Only registered members are able to post messages to this forum.

    If you are a member, please log in.

    If you aren't yet a member, join now!


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here