The GOP has a stable of potential winners, the Dems have one old mare

[Jackson]

How many lies and scandals will the Dems justify between now and November of next year?

Therein lies your problem

Conservatives have screamed about so many bogus lies and scandals that the public no longer pays attention

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

 

[kaz]

We're working out the issues rather than ignoring them. And they've been a mother's kiss to the early 90s or mid to late 60s.

Working out the issues????!!!! Is that what you call Obama and Holders biased interference in community affairs??

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

We're working out the issues rather than ignoring them. And they've been a mother's kiss to the early 90s or mid to late 60s.

Working out the issues????!!!! Is that what you call Obama and Holders biased interference in community affairs??

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

That's the ridiculous extreme liberals constantly go to.

Its very amusing to watch the dims twist and turn trying to justify running the old, tired, lying, corrupt, failed bitch HRC. But she is all they have, they have no one else. Its hilarious.

After Republicans nominated HW, HW, Viagra Bob, W, W, McCain and Romney, call me a skeptic as to who they will pick until I see it. The Republican party's inability to pick candidates is the only chance Chillary has. Unfortunately, it's a good chance...

It seems fairly clear that Americans, stopped letting the Left pick their Candidates, shortly after Pelosi declared:

"We'll just have to pass the bill to find out what's in the bill...". After that came the mid-term Landslide defeat of the Left... after that came the GOP's choice to run Romney... and the Left's Landslide loss... except for one candidate... then in the next election came the third Landslide defeat of the Left.

That proves how off the cliff the left has been, it doesn't show the Right can pick candidates

What candidate did The Right pick? Dole? McCain? Romney? No sir... the Left picked those clowns.

Go back through this very board... throw a dart at any political discussion held in 07 and see if you can find a Leftist that was not 'advising' the Reader that 'McCain is the only Republican that has a chance against the Brown Clown'. The same was true Romney in '12.

Why are conservatives so dumb that they let the left pick their candidates for them?

Maybe because their own party will not tolerate the nut balls they support

So the Republicans are picking crappy candidates because they pick such terrible candidates they let the left do it for them so they end up with crappy candidates.

That one got away from you, didn't it, big guy?

 

[kaz]

Under any SENSE of Reality... Hillary Clinton would presently be defending herself from Federal Charges ranging from violations of the RICO statutes, to TREASON.

That she is not, is a definitive sign that something well beyond 'corruption' is operating the highest levels of the United States Government.

That she is not being prosecuted is more evidence of your unsubstantiated conspiracy theories

The post you replied to answered that question. The corruption is rampant and coverup is in full force.

Oh no! Not the cover up ploy!
sure sign of makin' shit up!

Its very amusing to watch the dims twist and turn trying to justify running the old, tired, lying, corrupt, failed bitch HRC. But she is all they have, they have no one else. Its hilarious.

After Republicans nominated HW, HW, Viagra Bob, W, W, McCain and Romney, call me a skeptic as to who they will pick until I see it. The Republican party's inability to pick candidates is the only chance Chillary has. Unfortunately, it's a good chance...

And the Dems picked a community activist. I'd stop making judgments if I were you.

And The repubs picked a ptsd ridden vet and an a incredible stupid evangelical
it's not the dems judgment that's questionable.

Oh, you were doing so well until that last statement. Before the angry black man who's an empty suit in the white house, John Kerry? Are you kidding me? He was a gag candidate. Al Gore is a lunatic who says more stupid things than Dan Quayle did. Before that was your two election love of the sexual predator who caught a break by being on the good side of the internet bubble which had zero to do with him. Tsongas? Mondale? Carter? LOL, that's picking well? yeah

You'll get an anurisim yammering like that.

I know Obama is a deity, I was just kidding saying he wasn't

 

[Papageorgio]

How many lies and scandals will the Dems justify between now and November of next year?

Therein lies your problem

Conservatives have screamed about so many bogus lies and scandals that the public no longer pays attention

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So you don't care if any Presidential candidate lies. Can I hold you to that?

 

[Papageorgio]

Working out the issues????!!!! Is that what you call Obama and Holders biased interference in community affairs??

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

Working out the issues????!!!! Is that what you call Obama and Holders biased interference in community affairs??

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

That's the ridiculous extreme liberals constantly go to.

After Republicans nominated HW, HW, Viagra Bob, W, W, McCain and Romney, call me a skeptic as to who they will pick until I see it. The Republican party's inability to pick candidates is the only chance Chillary has. Unfortunately, it's a good chance...

It seems fairly clear that Americans, stopped letting the Left pick their Candidates, shortly after Pelosi declared:

"We'll just have to pass the bill to find out what's in the bill...". After that came the mid-term Landslide defeat of the Left... after that came the GOP's choice to run Romney... and the Left's Landslide loss... except for one candidate... then in the next election came the third Landslide defeat of the Left.

That proves how off the cliff the left has been, it doesn't show the Right can pick candidates

What candidate did The Right pick? Dole? McCain? Romney? No sir... the Left picked those clowns.

Go back through this very board... throw a dart at any political discussion held in 07 and see if you can find a Leftist that was not 'advising' the Reader that 'McCain is the only Republican that has a chance against the Brown Clown'. The same was true Romney in '12.

Why are conservatives so dumb that they let the left pick their candidates for them?

Maybe because their own party will not tolerate the nut balls they support

So the Republicans are picking crappy candidates because they pick such terrible candidates they let the left do it for them so they end up with crappy candidates.

That one got away from you, didn't it, big guy?

And the liar Hillary is a good candidate?

She and her lying are a big joke!

 

[rightwinger]

Therein lies your problem

Conservatives have screamed about so many bogus lies and scandals that the public no longer pays attention

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

 

[Jackson]

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

Eric Garner warrants some 'interference'. The man was arrested for nothing.....and killed for it.

That's the ridiculous extreme liberals constantly go to.

It seems fairly clear that Americans, stopped letting the Left pick their Candidates, shortly after Pelosi declared:

"We'll just have to pass the bill to find out what's in the bill...". After that came the mid-term Landslide defeat of the Left... after that came the GOP's choice to run Romney... and the Left's Landslide loss... except for one candidate... then in the next election came the third Landslide defeat of the Left.

That proves how off the cliff the left has been, it doesn't show the Right can pick candidates

What candidate did The Right pick? Dole? McCain? Romney? No sir... the Left picked those clowns.

Go back through this very board... throw a dart at any political discussion held in 07 and see if you can find a Leftist that was not 'advising' the Reader that 'McCain is the only Republican that has a chance against the Brown Clown'. The same was true Romney in '12.

Why are conservatives so dumb that they let the left pick their candidates for them?

Maybe because their own party will not tolerate the nut balls they support

So the Republicans are picking crappy candidates because they pick such terrible candidates they let the left do it for them so they end up with crappy candidates.

That one got away from you, didn't it, big guy?

And the liar Hillary is a good candidate?

She and her lying are a big joke!

This is true, but subjective liberals don't seem to care. That is scary and how we ended up with Obama for two elections.

 

[rightwinger]

Therein lies your problem

Conservatives have screamed about so many bogus lies and scandals that the public no longer pays attention

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So you don't care if any Presidential candidate lies. Can I hold you to that?

I don't care about GOP half truths and resulting hysteria

 

[Silhouette]

The GOP has a stable of potential winners, the Dems have one old mare

True. And she's wearing a set of rainbow-colored hobbles to boot..

 

[Jackson]

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

 

[Jackson]

So how many of Hillary's lie do you believe? Bosnia? She was broke leaving the WH? She only knows how to put one e-mail on a phone or she only had one phone. Wait is Bosnia a lie? Was she named after Sir Hillary? How about the vast Right Wing conspiracy? Or how about Bill not having sex with Monica?

We can keep going on, but I have a tough time believing she can tell the truth.

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So you don't care if any Presidential candidate lies. Can I hold you to that?

I don't care about GOP half truths and resulting hysteria

What half truths, the person who made the statement and what resulting hysteria?

 

[Pete7469]

It was FREEFALL headed to depression

Obama stopped it

All by his wittle sewf too, wong wive da moonbat messiah.

They really are this stupid.

 

[Skylar]

And you are not going to grant that an effect of this "complaints of necessary force plummeting" is the fact that the police are just not doing their job for fear of ending up in court?

In San Diego? Nope. The exact opposite is true:

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate

Over the past five years, the felony arrest rate has steadily risen in San Diego County, according to a report released by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Tuesday.

The report found that the felony arrest rate in 2013 was eight percent higher than it was in 2009. Five years ago, felonies represented 28 percent of all adult arrests. In 2014 that rose to 35 percent.

In 2013, San Diego had the second highest adult arrest rate in California, at 35.9 arrests per 1,000 population, behind only San Bernardino County. It also had the highest juvenile arrest rate in the state at 25.8. The adult arrest rate still marked a significant drop from five years ago, when it was at 41.9.

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

So that's two of your baseless excuses that are down. How many more are you going to make up before you accept the distinct possibility that the reduction in uses of force are because the police are being watched?

You're copping a squat over any semblance of 'objectivity' the more you bend over backwards with made up excuses that don't match the evidence.

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

 

[CowboyTed]

No.. not being prosecuted is literally NOT evidence of innocence. But how ADORABLE is it that you think it is.

The Clintons are in violation of a litany of Federal Law... this is not even debatable.

That she has not been charged and is not being prosecuted for such IS, literally... evidence of a criminal conspiracy within the Federal Executive Branch.

Of course its debatable .

LOL! Yet, when you had the opportunity to do so, ya chose NOT TO.

Now, I wonder, what SHOULD we make of THAT?

Didn't know there was a time limit on debate Bengazi is a good example

Whitewater is another example...went on for eight years

Whitewater was a criminal syndicate... the investigation of it resulted in numerous felony arrests from the sitting governor of Arkansas, to every partner relevant to the enterprise except the Clintons. Who were as guilty as the others, but who escaped charges, by virtue of the untimely deaths of the witnesses.

Usual idiotic mud slinging...

This tells us nothing about the Clintons but makes the poster look like a complete fucking idiot...

 

[rightwinger]

Therein lies your problem

These things get big AirPlay in the conservative media and you think the rest of the country gives a shit

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

 

[rightwinger]

It was FREEFALL headed to depression

Obama stopped it

All by his wittle sewf too, wong wive da moonbat messiah.

They really are this stupid.

I'm not the one babbling in baby talk

 

[Jackson]

And you are not going to grant that an effect of this "complaints of necessary force plummeting" is the fact that the police are just not doing their job for fear of ending up in court?

In San Diego? Nope. The exact opposite is true:

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate

Over the past five years, the felony arrest rate has steadily risen in San Diego County, according to a report released by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Tuesday.

The report found that the felony arrest rate in 2013 was eight percent higher than it was in 2009. Five years ago, felonies represented 28 percent of all adult arrests. In 2014 that rose to 35 percent.

In 2013, San Diego had the second highest adult arrest rate in California, at 35.9 arrests per 1,000 population, behind only San Bernardino County. It also had the highest juvenile arrest rate in the state at 25.8. The adult arrest rate still marked a significant drop from five years ago, when it was at 41.9.

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

So that's two of your baseless excuses that are down. How many more are you going to make up before you accept the distinct possibility that the reduction in uses of force are because the police are being watched?

You're copping a squat over any semblance of 'objectivity' the more you bend over backwards with made up excuses that don't match the evidence.

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

The claim of objectivity still stands. I was impressed with the data on arrests and feel that the city is not being affected as other metropolitan areas. I looked more at the data provided and other data to complete the observance. Do you feel that the fact that San Diego has a black population of 6.7% has made a difference?

San Diego - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

San Diego is probably not alone. Other cities with the same demographics would be interesting to study.

 

[Jackson]

So which ones do you believe, she is you potential candidate and you trust her, so do you believe all her lies or don't believe she lied or you just pick and choose when to believe her?

I'm not sure how you guys have it figured.

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

Okay, How about when Hillary said, "What difference does it make?" It made a helluva difference when there were dead people resulting from inappropriate actions of the State Dept. She wanted everyone to think, "We can't bring them back to life, so what's the difference."

But she was ignoring the fact that their actions contributed to the unsafe conditions in Benghazi.

Another, "You didn't build that" defies any logic. Can't give Obama a pass on that or perhaps it was inept speech writers. Of course Americans built our infrastructure. But the Community Organizer didn't realkize that as much as their are not 57 states.

 

[Skylar]

And you are not going to grant that an effect of this "complaints of necessary force plummeting" is the fact that the police are just not doing their job for fear of ending up in court?

In San Diego? Nope. The exact opposite is true:

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate

Over the past five years, the felony arrest rate has steadily risen in San Diego County, according to a report released by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Tuesday.

The report found that the felony arrest rate in 2013 was eight percent higher than it was in 2009. Five years ago, felonies represented 28 percent of all adult arrests. In 2014 that rose to 35 percent.

In 2013, San Diego had the second highest adult arrest rate in California, at 35.9 arrests per 1,000 population, behind only San Bernardino County. It also had the highest juvenile arrest rate in the state at 25.8. The adult arrest rate still marked a significant drop from five years ago, when it was at 41.9.

San Diego sees spike in felony arrest rate - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

So that's two of your baseless excuses that are down. How many more are you going to make up before you accept the distinct possibility that the reduction in uses of force are because the police are being watched?

You're copping a squat over any semblance of 'objectivity' the more you bend over backwards with made up excuses that don't match the evidence.

So, what was the arrest rate since Ferguson came into play?

Higher. But its irrelevant.

The numbers comparing San Diego cops before before body cams and after all came before Ferguson. Making Fergeson irrelevant to the numbers I'm citing.

Sigh....I was hoping with your talk of 'objectivity' I could present evidence and it might make an impact. Apparently I was wrong.

Arrests haven't gone down. They've gone up. Uses of force have gone

The claim of objectivity still stands.

Then objectively, what is your explanation for the stark reduction in the use of force by police officers by their own reporting when body cams were implemented. We've already eliminated the 'they aren't doing their job because they are afraid' angle. Arrests are up. And the 'false allegation' angle. As these are self reported numbers.

So what do you have left?

Objectively, my explanation works: that much of the use of force by police officers before body cams wasn't necessary.

Its an explanation blessed with the credibility of simplicity (Occam's Razor anyone?), is supported by other evidence (accompanying reduction in complaints of excessive force) and matches the evidence. Nothing you've presented does.

So.....can you offer a better explanation? If no, then why are you rejecting mine? Especially when your last two excuses didn't work.

I was impressed with the data on arrests and feel that the city is not being affected as other metropolitan areas. I looked more at the data provided and other data to complete the observance. Do you feel that the fact that San Diego has a black population of 6.7% has made a difference?

San Diego - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

San Diego is probably not alone. Other cities with the same demographics would be interesting to study.

The demographics of the area didn't change significantly from the year before the use of body cams to the year that body cams were used. Yet use of force changed dramatically between those two years. Body cams are the only significant difference. The black population percentage remained essentially unchanged.

 

[rightwinger]

I lean towards don't give a shit

I have seen enough of the rightwing circle jerk where they take quotes out of context and then misinterpret them. Gets good play on Fox, but the rest of the country is tired of you crying wolf

So, let's take your post and run with a debate. Can you give specific reports and links? How often do you watch Fox?

Let's start with

You didn't build that
We have to vote on it to see what's in it
What difference does it make?

And just what quote did the candidate/official not mean what they said?

Pick any one and we can get to what was REALY said

Okay, How about when Hillary said, "What difference does it make?" It made a helluva difference when there were dead people resulting from inappropriate actions of the State Dept. She wanted everyone to think, "We can't bring them back to life, so what's the difference."

But she was ignoring the fact that their actions contributed to the unsafe conditions in Benghazi.

Another, "You didn't build that" defies any logic. Can't give Obama a pass on that or perhaps it was inept speech writers. Of course Americans built our infrastructure. But the Community Organizer didn't realkize that as much as their are not 57 states.

Good ones

Hillary is answering a question about the cause of the attack being reaction to a video or planned terrorism. She replies "what difference does it make" in how we have to respond to the attacks
Republicans twist it to mean.....Hllary doesn't care that people died

Obama is speaking roads and infrastructure and says businesses didn't build that
Republicans twist it to imply Obama claims you didn't build your business