FLASH: Clinton Campaign Says She Has Pneumonia (Really)

[Ray From Cleveland]

Surely taking drugs is about choice. At what point are we taking that choice away?

We are not putting much effort into taking that choice away. You won't find one junkie saying he or she is so glad they started opiate narcotics.

 

[Dot Com]

 

[Dot Com]

 

[frigidweirdo]

Yeah, Trump spoke about the loony Clinton Bootlickers the other day. He said she could literally walk into the rally and shoot several people, and the Clinton Bootlickers would find a way to justify it. I don't get how they can support the evil corrupt witch and her rapist husband. It's mind-boggling.

I couldn't agree more. It's amazing how people like big government....its how Stalin, hitler and those bozos get power.

Wait, Trump came out and said he'd increase government spending, and you'll still vote for him.

Yes.

Amazing.

You'd have sex with a brick wall if it had a Republican sticker on it.

Liar.

Well this is going well, isn't it?

 

[frigidweirdo]

The food stamp system is a symbol of what is wrong with US politics. And the wall would become a similar symbol.

Two different things. Food stamps encourage people not to work or become something. A wall deters people from trying to sneak in.

Even the border people support Trump because they know that the wall will make their jobs much easier and safer. Even if it's not a complete wall immediately, border security can dedicate more agents to the open spots until we close those off as well. Less illegals and less illegal drugs would help this country considerably. Food stamps don't do that.

A wall might deter some people, but there's already a boundary there which is a deterrent.

Will the new wall stop people trying? There's already this fence, with patrols and the like.

Also, people can get through at the border points. Is it actually going to have a difference?
Is it going to be worth the amount of money that would be spent? Could such money not be used far more effectively elsewhere?

If the wall is made on the cheap, because it's just to show Trump doing what he said he would do, when he realizes he can't actually afford to build a wall that would be effective, then what?

 

[Markle]

Seems to be. Lots of things appear to be in such a way because of the way the media and political people manipulate the stories for their own gain.

Sure, you can manipulate stories, but you can't manipulate videos.

You can't diagnosis Clinton's medical condition by looking at a 10 second video of her being helped in or out of a car. Read what her doctor says along with tests and a CT Scan, if you want her real medical information.

http://documents.latimes.com/read-letter-hillary-clintons-doctor/

She lost consciousness at the 9/11 memorial. Former President Bill Clinton said it happened frequently until he tried to walk back his slip of the tongue.

She never lost consciousness. She was alert the whole time, telling staff that she was fine. She was actually making calls to aides from the car.

The poor woman went down like a bag of rocks. You can even see she is being dragged into the care. Cute effort.

 

[Markle]

Of course you can. Videos only show something. They don't tell the whole story.

If videos are manipulated it's usually pointed out and obvious even to a novice.

The whole story is I've seen cops put drunks into their police cars with much less effort than it took to shove Hillary in that SUV.

There are ways of manipulating evidence without actually changing the evidence.

Here's a nice one to show what I mean.

Headline: Man holds kid off balcony and endangers the child, should be sent to prison.

I didn't change the picture, I manipulated the mind into thinking something was a problem when there wasn't actually a problem at all.

Total fail on your part. No balcony, it's obviously an electric train set.

 

[frigidweirdo]

Surely taking drugs is about choice. At what point are we taking that choice away?

We are not putting much effort into taking that choice away. You won't find one junkie saying he or she is so glad they started opiate narcotics.

Maybe not. People make choices they don't like.

The question is how do you make it so they don't bother with this choice in the first place?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Of course you can. Videos only show something. They don't tell the whole story.

If videos are manipulated it's usually pointed out and obvious even to a novice.

The whole story is I've seen cops put drunks into their police cars with much less effort than it took to shove Hillary in that SUV.

There are ways of manipulating evidence without actually changing the evidence.

Here's a nice one to show what I mean.

Headline: Man holds kid off balcony and endangers the child, should be sent to prison.

I didn't change the picture, I manipulated the mind into thinking something was a problem when there wasn't actually a problem at all.

Total fail on your part. No balcony, it's obviously an electric train set.

And an even bigger failure on your part to completely ignore the POINT.

 

[Markle]

And yet Reagan was able to complete his presidency. What's to suggest Hillary wouldn't be able to?

Nothing. But you have to come clean first as to what your medical problems are so that voters can decide if you are capable of being President.

And what do the people know about other people's medical problems? I mean seriously, if someone says they have pneumonia, is it up to the people to decide whether you will live or not? Unless it's something serious that will impede someone doing their job in JANUARY, then what's the issue?

Seriously, I don't like Hillary, but you can see what those on the right who are making a big deal out of it are doing. They're not giving a damn about the facts. They've already had her down as having all kinds of medical problems, and they made it all up. Why? Because they seem to think politics is this stupid game you play like school kids.

If people actually looked at elected a CEO of the country and getting the best person for the job, we wouldn't have ended up with Trump v. Hillary, would we?

Well, they have to make a big deal of it. It's all they got. Soon the debates will start and there will be real issues to discuss that actually effect us.

But then they've shown they're not interested in the real issues.

They want a wall, because a wall is going to do nothing, except cost money.

Why then does Mexico have a wall all across their SOUTHERN border? To keep Mexican citizens from going to South America? Why should we have no border between us and Mexico? Mexico want's the fence too.

 

[Markle]

Of course you can. Videos only show something. They don't tell the whole story.

If videos are manipulated it's usually pointed out and obvious even to a novice.

The whole story is I've seen cops put drunks into their police cars with much less effort than it took to shove Hillary in that SUV.

There are ways of manipulating evidence without actually changing the evidence.

Here's a nice one to show what I mean.

Headline: Man holds kid off balcony and endangers the child, should be sent to prison.

I didn't change the picture, I manipulated the mind into thinking something was a problem when there wasn't actually a problem at all.

Total fail on your part. No balcony, it's obviously an electric train set.

And an even bigger failure on your part to completely ignore the POINT.

The point is that no person with one iota of sense would believe that photo is anything other than an electric train set. If they believe what you infer, then they'd believe the infant is escaping prison trying to hop a train!

 

[Markle]

Nothing. But you have to come clean first as to what your medical problems are so that voters can decide if you are capable of being President.

And what do the people know about other people's medical problems? I mean seriously, if someone says they have pneumonia, is it up to the people to decide whether you will live or not? Unless it's something serious that will impede someone doing their job in JANUARY, then what's the issue?

Seriously, I don't like Hillary, but you can see what those on the right who are making a big deal out of it are doing. They're not giving a damn about the facts. They've already had her down as having all kinds of medical problems, and they made it all up. Why? Because they seem to think politics is this stupid game you play like school kids.

If people actually looked at elected a CEO of the country and getting the best person for the job, we wouldn't have ended up with Trump v. Hillary, would we?

Well, they have to make a big deal of it. It's all they got. Soon the debates will start and there will be real issues to discuss that actually effect us.

But then they've shown they're not interested in the real issues.

They want a wall, because a wall is going to do nothing, except cost money.

The wall will produce jobs and protect our sovereignty andl law abiding citizens lives.

It might make jobs. Are you suggesting the US govt make jobs by implementing useless projects?

Protect the US sovereignty? How's that? There's already a barrier in the way of the US and Mexico, a wall can still be dug under, it won't do anything. You might as well pay for more people to patrol the border area than pay for a wall that'll do nothing.

The entire failed Stimulus was blown on useless projects.

Here in Tallahassee, we got a $3.2 MILLION TURTLE TUNNEL. It goes under the 4 lane US 27 N between the large and small part of Lake Jackson.

Iron pilings going into the ground capped with concrete. Mighty powerful turtles we have here in Tallahassee.

 

[Markle]

Surely taking drugs is about choice. At what point are we taking that choice away?

We are not putting much effort into taking that choice away. You won't find one junkie saying he or she is so glad they started opiate narcotics.

Maybe not. People make choices they don't like.

The question is how do you make it so they don't bother with this choice in the first place?

If they don't give a rat's behind about making bad choices, why is that my business? We're supposed to be a FREE country meaning you can make bad decisions as well as good.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Maybe not. People make choices they don't like.

The question is how do you make it so they don't bother with this choice in the first place?

By making it less available.

 

[Steve_McGarrett]

Breaking Update:

Prominent Muslim Doctor Says Hillary Passed Out From Cardio or Neurological Disorder | EUTimes.net

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The food stamp system is a symbol of what is wrong with US politics. And the wall would become a similar symbol.

Two different things. Food stamps encourage people not to work or become something. A wall deters people from trying to sneak in.

Even the border people support Trump because they know that the wall will make their jobs much easier and safer. Even if it's not a complete wall immediately, border security can dedicate more agents to the open spots until we close those off as well. Less illegals and less illegal drugs would help this country considerably. Food stamps don't do that.

A wall might deter some people, but there's already a boundary there which is a deterrent.

Will the new wall stop people trying? There's already this fence, with patrols and the like.

Also, people can get through at the border points. Is it actually going to have a difference?
Is it going to be worth the amount of money that would be spent? Could such money not be used far more effectively elsewhere?

If the wall is made on the cheap, because it's just to show Trump doing what he said he would do, when he realizes he can't actually afford to build a wall that would be effective, then what?

Okay, so if a wall won't work, then what would? And if nothing would work, do we simply surrender our country and sovereignty and surrender leaving terrorists, drug smugglers, and immigrants to roam our country freely?

Saying a wall won't work is like saying border security won't work. Imagine what kind of country we would have without border security.

 

[Dot Com]

 

[frigidweirdo]

And yet Reagan was able to complete his presidency. What's to suggest Hillary wouldn't be able to?

Nothing. But you have to come clean first as to what your medical problems are so that voters can decide if you are capable of being President.

And what do the people know about other people's medical problems? I mean seriously, if someone says they have pneumonia, is it up to the people to decide whether you will live or not? Unless it's something serious that will impede someone doing their job in JANUARY, then what's the issue?

Seriously, I don't like Hillary, but you can see what those on the right who are making a big deal out of it are doing. They're not giving a damn about the facts. They've already had her down as having all kinds of medical problems, and they made it all up. Why? Because they seem to think politics is this stupid game you play like school kids.

If people actually looked at elected a CEO of the country and getting the best person for the job, we wouldn't have ended up with Trump v. Hillary, would we?

Well, they have to make a big deal of it. It's all they got. Soon the debates will start and there will be real issues to discuss that actually effect us.

But then they've shown they're not interested in the real issues.

They want a wall, because a wall is going to do nothing, except cost money.

Why then does Mexico have a wall all across their SOUTHERN border? To keep Mexican citizens from going to South America? Why should we have no border between us and Mexico? Mexico want's the fence too.

No one's saying there shouldn't be a border at all. People are saying there is no need to build a wall.

Trump says the wall would cost $8 billion. If the US built an Israeli style "wall" it would cost $26 billion and have a significant yearly maintenance cost, and only 10% of Israeli's "wall" is actually wall. They only see a need for a wall when snipers are a problem, not an issue on the US/Mexican border.

The US already has a border, it's already got a fence, it could probably be upgraded to make it more effective, but making a wall isn't going to be good use of money compared to possibilities.

 

[frigidweirdo]

The food stamp system is a symbol of what is wrong with US politics. And the wall would become a similar symbol.

Two different things. Food stamps encourage people not to work or become something. A wall deters people from trying to sneak in.

Even the border people support Trump because they know that the wall will make their jobs much easier and safer. Even if it's not a complete wall immediately, border security can dedicate more agents to the open spots until we close those off as well. Less illegals and less illegal drugs would help this country considerably. Food stamps don't do that.

A wall might deter some people, but there's already a boundary there which is a deterrent.

Will the new wall stop people trying? There's already this fence, with patrols and the like.

Also, people can get through at the border points. Is it actually going to have a difference?
Is it going to be worth the amount of money that would be spent? Could such money not be used far more effectively elsewhere?

If the wall is made on the cheap, because it's just to show Trump doing what he said he would do, when he realizes he can't actually afford to build a wall that would be effective, then what?

Okay, so if a wall won't work, then what would? And if nothing would work, do we simply surrender our country and sovereignty and surrender leaving terrorists, drug smugglers, and immigrants to roam our country freely?

Saying a wall won't work is like saying border security won't work. Imagine what kind of country we would have without border security.

The point here is what you want to achieve and what is the most cost effective way of achieving this. Do you want to stop people climbing over the fence? Barbed wire and the like, perhaps double fence. Do you want to stop people getting under the fence? Then there are ways of deal with this too.

At the moment people are simply saying a wall would be good without saying what they think is needed that doesn't happen right now. They're saying a wall because it's simple.

No, saying a wall won't work is saying that it doesn't change anything from the current situation. If you want something to be effective then you need to find out what the problems are, what possible solutions there, which is the most cost effective for what you want to achieve. Trump just says "wall". There's not been a decent thinking about it, other than he knows some people would be happy because they like simple solutions that sound good, rather than are good.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

The point here is what you want to achieve and what is the most cost effective way of achieving this. Do you want to stop people climbing over the fence? Barbed wire and the like, perhaps double fence. Do you want to stop people getting under the fence? Then there are ways of deal with this too.

At the moment people are simply saying a wall would be good without saying what they think is needed that doesn't happen right now. They're saying a wall because it's simple.

No, saying a wall won't work is saying that it doesn't change anything from the current situation. If you want something to be effective then you need to find out what the problems are, what possible solutions there, which is the most cost effective for what you want to achieve. Trump just says "wall". There's not been a decent thinking about it, other than he knows some people would be happy because they like simple solutions that sound good, rather than are good.

You are talking in circles now.

If you can't go over the wall, and you can't dig under the wall, how could a wall not work?

The only people left would be those who overstay their Visa's and work permits. If we could at least eliminate the border crossers, we could dedicate much more time to getting the Visa people.

Like I said, if it were up to me, it would be a five year minimum prison sentence for anybody caught here illegally. But of course, nobody would do that left or right.