hillary or osama er bama....

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

GR: I don't think his intention was to blame her,,,just to show that she's not the mover and shaker she perports to be!

And he may have excellent stuff to back that up, but other than getting earmarks for their states, Senators don't have a lot of control over their state economy and their state's health plans; that power belongs to the state representatives and governor (and even they don't have much control in some cases). A better example, really, would be of her wussy yes-and-no weird vote on the flag-burning thing. I mean, take a position, lady!

(Now, see how easy that was?)

"purports"

[timmgirvan]

[quote=GenuineRisk]Timm, I hate to say it again, but if you're going to post things, you need to be willing to back it up yourself, not tell me it's my responsibility to go Google it (hey, I thought you Republicans were all about personal responsibility, and here you are telling me it's my job to go try to prove you right. Wha?). If you can't post the info to back up your assertions, I don't have any reason to believe them. Yes, please find the "death list" and post the link. Without the link I have no reason to believe you didn't just make it up. I can say Bush and Condi are f*cking like bunnies, but I gots no proof. (actually, they probably aren't. Condi doesn't come across like a woman who's getting any)

(But I'll still design your campaign t-shirts while DTS is grassroots campaigning for you. )

Sorry I was out; I was in meetings all night. Way to spend a Friday. [/Qhttp://www.lizmichael.com/clintond.htmUOTE] This is a list,partial I believe, more than coincidence. I do understand that you've had a long day.

[GenuineRisk]

[quote=timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by GenuineRisk

Timm, I hate to say it again, but if you're going to post things, you need to be willing to back it up yourself, not tell me it's my responsibility to go Google it (hey, I thought you Republicans were all about personal responsibility, and here you are telling me it's my job to go try to prove you right. Wha?). If you can't post the info to back up your assertions, I don't have any reason to believe them. Yes, please find the "death list" and post the link. Without the link I have no reason to believe you didn't just make it up. I can say Bush and Condi are f*cking like bunnies, but I gots no proof. (actually, they probably aren't. Condi doesn't come across like a woman who's getting any)

(But I'll still design your campaign t-shirts while DTS is grassroots campaigning for you. )

Sorry I was out; I was in meetings all night. Way to spend a Friday. [/Qhttp://www.lizmichael.com/clintond.htmUOTE] This is a list,partial I believe, more than coincidence. I do understand that you've had a long day.

What you posted isn't quite a link, but I'll try to copy and paste it into my browser tomorrow and then we can discuss. I have to go sleep tonight- meeting with a vocal coach tomorrow. Sigh... I'll be so glad when the next five days are over.

[timmgirvan]

http://www.lizmichael.com/clintond.htm I don't know why this isn't linking up like a normal link!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

http://www.lizmichael.com/clintond.htm I don't know why this isn't linking up like a normal link!

i'm not really sure how a list of people who have some connection to the president of the united states is really an indictment against the person.

if i were the president (aka the most prominent, well known, powerful person in the country) i'm sure there would be a list just as long of people i'd gone to high school with, bought drinks for, been in a picture with,matter of fact i can think of at least two dozen off the top of my head...shall we make a brian w spencer death list and insinuate that i've had a hand in killing them?

you make it sound like hillary ordered hits on these people.

that list is a fine example of list-making, but it doesn't really say anything, foir as much as you've pretended it would during this thread.

absurd tim...and i know that you're smart enough to know it. you're not crazy fanatic after all...or at least i thought you weren't. do you really believe that stuff?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by brianwspencer

i'm not really sure how a list of people who have some connection to the president of the united states is really an indictment against the person.

if i were the president (aka the most prominent, well known, powerful person in the country) i'm sure there would be a list just as long of people i'd gone to high school with, bought drinks for, been in a picture with,matter of fact i can think of at least two dozen off the top of my head...shall we make a brian w spencer death list and insinuate that i've had a hand in killing them?

you make it sound like hillary ordered hits on these people.

that list is a fine example of list-making, but it doesn't really say anything, foir as much as you've pretended it would during this thread.

absurd tim...and i know that you're smart enough to know it. you're not crazy fanatic after all...or at least i thought you weren't. do you really believe that stuff?

Brian: you might be a child prodigy, but you're too young to have followed this story from inception. This trail of bodies is just the evolution of the Clinton political machine..some were enemies..some were in spots where they could detail the inner workings of the machine the dynamic duo(sorry,BM&R). When their closest allies weren't needed, or were going to fold on them, they seemed to fall ill or have an accident,conveniently. I'm smart enough to know that this situation is more probable than the Govt having a hand in 9/11! The Clintons' are predators. The facts are not cursory, and singly might not draw attention...but to those who are familiar with the duo, the pattern is there. There are other lists,probably with more detail...since I haven't revisited this deal in a long time. And there are books that speak of their history. What you do with info is up to you...the MSM just buries it.

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Brian: you might be a child prodigy, but you're too young to have followed this story from inception. This trail of bodies is just the evolution of the Clinton political machine..some were enemies..some were in spots where they could detail the inner workings of the machine the dynamic duo(sorry,BM&R). When their closest allies weren't needed, or were going to fold on them, they seemed to fall ill or have an accident,conveniently. I'm smart enough to know that this situation is more probable than the Govt having a hand in 9/11! The Clintons' are predators. The facts are not cursory, and singly might not draw attention...but to those who are familiar with the duo, the pattern is there. There are other lists,probably with more detail...since I haven't revisited this deal in a long time. And there are books that speak of their history. What you do with info is up to you...the MSM just buries it.

From your list, Timm:
JAMES MCDOUGAL - Clinton's convicted Whitewater partner died of an apparent heart attack, while in solitary confinement. McDougal was a key witness in Kenneth Starr's investigation.

So, under logic like this, GW Bush MUST be responsible for Ken Lays' death, right? I mean, he was chock full of Bush info (chartered him for free on the Enron jet during the '00 campaign and Bush called him "Kenny Boy") so therefore Bush must have had him killed, since he died of an apparent heart attack.

I did some googling on Liz Michael (the owner of the website you posted), and boy, she's an interesting case- wants, apparently, a new Confederacy, founded as a theocracy:

http://atheism.about.com/b/a/062916.htm

And here's her lovely comments on the "Million Mom March"

"The so-called "Million Mom March" represents a clear and present danger to every woman in this nation, especially every teenage girl in this nation. Every woman participating in this march is particpating in an act that may very well lead to her own death, assault, or rape, as well as the death, assault or rape of any woman or young girl in her family."

Lovely. I would certainly want to listen to a woman who seems to think there's an armed rapist/pedophile behind every tree.

Holy cow, how much more culture of fear can these people drum up?

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Genetic fallacy, anyone?

C'mon, Bababooyee, haven't you read the list? No one dies until the Clintons order it.

Here's more conspiracy hilarity:

http://www.georgewalkerbush.net/bushdeathlist.htm

What's awesome about these lists is that Rob Brown appears on BOTH of them.

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

Brian: you might be a child prodigy, but you're too young to have followed this story from inception.

Not sure that my being too young infers that I can't have a grasp on the situation. My age has nothing more to do with it than your unfailing belief that the Clintons had a hand in their deaths. We obviously see it different ways, and we're approaching it from those places. Age doesn't necessarily preclude one from having a grasp on history. Matter of fact, for quite awhile in college I was extremely well-versed in Chinese history, including dynasties and the incredible changes the country went through during the last several hundred years. I was also too young to know about that (as were all of us on the forum), but I managed to figure that out. History is history. Spin is spin. Having someone (who was exposed in a later post in the thread as more or less a complete whackjob) compile a list of people who knew the President (reminder: the most powerful, influential, well-known person in the nation) that died doesn't really serve to tell us anything at all, except that the President knows a lot of people.

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

For example, I don't see you (or brian to a lesser extent) being nearly as skeptical or critical when DTS starts posting his moronic links or crazy (and/or substance induced) rants. But someone says something against a Clinton, and... .

Well if someone would say something about the Clintons that were actually factual and not just wild, partisan speculation, it might be a bit different....

As for criticizing or being skeptical of DTS' posts...do I really need to comment on that? Trust me, I'm wildly skeptical, but there are not enough hours in a day to comment back to all of them and reminding everyone about their source and subsequent veracity. I doubt you'd find many places on this forum where I responded directly to a link DTS posted and took it as unfailingly true.....because they're not. I love reading The Nation...but I hardly consider everything they say to be true, because they obviously have a partisan agenda. It's no secret and I'm smart enough to know that people spin things the way they want them spun. (Example: Bill O'Reilly can say all he wants that he's not a Republican or a Democrat and that he's not partisan and that he doesn't spin things...but one week of watching shows otherwise [i still enjoy his show], and so can DTS, say he's not partisan. It doesn't make it true.)

Using DTS' posts as an example is faulty logic in showing that either of us jumps at everything like that....because I'm not sure very many people take those links seriously to begin with. I don't at least....for the record

[GenuineRisk]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

And, fwiw, I was steeped in conspiracy theories in the early to mid 90s, and have heard all about the Klintons and Arkansas Suicides. I've also followed many of the current Bush conspiracy theories.

Stepping back from the actual content and looking at the whole thing more broadly, it is interesting how those on the right bought the Klinton stuff and those on the left were unshakingly skeptical; now, those on the left buy the Bush stuff and those on the right are unshakingly skeptical. (Ima sure one could write an interesting book on the effect the information age has had on conspiracy theories, increased numbers of them and/or their wider dissemination).

For example, I don't see you (or brian to a lesser extent) being nearly as skeptical or critical when DTS starts posting his moronic links or crazy (and/or substance induced) rants. But someone says something against a Clinton, and...

And please consider that I used you (GR) and brian as my examples as a compliment; while you may lean left, you both seem rather intelligent, so I kinda expect more than from the average leftist.

I'll respond later, because it's an understandable accusation, but I have to go to vocal coaching and scare a few people with my "singing"...

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by Bababooyee

Yeah, lol, in hindsight, that wasn't exactly fair!

And fyi. I don't really buy conspiracy theories from any side -- and I doubt there are any posts to expose that I do. I don't even buy Bush theories (except that he's a bumbling tool....but I'm not sure that qualifies as a conspiracy theory, it may be more attentive observation...). I think most conspiracy theorists are just people with too much time on their hands.

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

GR: I don't think his intention was to blame her,,,just to show that she's not the mover and shaker she perports to be!

I dont know what she says about herself. I know what I have heard from friends and relatives that work for Corning, and they have given me examples of other companies that she has worked with. Then I heard about much of the stuff on NPR that my relatives had already told me about. OOPs NPR and my relatives cant be trusted. And how did you get your information that she does nothing? And if Canon has not felt her effects directly I can tell you that I have not felt any effects directly of our great senators in the State of Texas, Kay Bailey and John Cornyn. So because Canon has not felt direct effects she has done nothing... Hmmmm.

Bottom line Timm: you may not like her, but the lady gets work done. I can understand why people do not like her poll watching. But do not confuse this with her willingness to work her rear off to get things accomplished instead of JUST playing the critic, like many Democratic candidates.

[Cannon Shell]

Originally Posted by pgardn

I dont know what she says about herself. I know what I have heard from friends and relatives that work for Corning, and they have given me examples of other companies that she has worked with. Then I heard about much of the stuff on NPR that my relatives had already told me about. OOPs NPR and my relatives cant be trusted. And how did you get your information that she does nothing? And if Canon has not felt her effects directly I can tell you that I have not felt any effects directly of our great senators in the State of Texas, Kay Bailey and John Cornyn. So because Canon has not felt direct effects she has done nothing... Hmmmm.

Bottom line Timm: you may not like her, but the lady gets work done. I can understand why people do not like her poll watching. But do not confuse this with her willingness to work her rear off to get things accomplished instead of JUST playing the critic, like many Democratic candidates.

It is simple really. Just tell me what tangible positive effect Senator Clinton has had on the citizens of NY. Maybe I missed somwething but no one that I know that lives in NY can think of one thing.

[PSH]

I am a die hard Democrat and it is painfully obvious that Hillary is not electable. Not even a discussion here....

PSH

[timmgirvan]

GR/Brian: Let's wrap this thing up....Liz Michael does sound like a whackjob! But it was a list. As I said, there are others. McDougal wasn't finished testifying with Starr, having being visited last by Susan McDougal before his death. You may blithely disregard these happenings as revengeful political rantings, but I assure that's not the situation with me. The probability of all these things happening around the Clintons' is astronomical,but doesn't make that irreffutable, it draws a circle around the actions of a political machine that won't stop for 2nd place. The recent attacks on Obama,Kerry and others point to the sublety of actions(at whatever price) and her rushed announcement of her candidacy(?)is Modus operandi for this group. But, heh, I just won't vote for her! Pardon my Interruption...I'm just tired of the whole scene right now. btw...Brian: I wasn't denigrating your youth...just the time frame of your reference. Cheers!

[brianwspencer]

Originally Posted by timmgirvan

GR/Brian: Let's wrap this thing up....Liz Michael does sound like a whackjob! But it was a list. As I said, there are others. McDougal wasn't finished testifying with Starr, having being visited last by Susan McDougal before his death. You may blithely disregard these happenings as revengeful political rantings, but I assure that's not the situation with me. The probability of all these things happening around the Clintons' is astronomical,but doesn't make that irreffutable, it draws a circle around the actions of a political machine that won't stop for 2nd place. The recent attacks on Obama,Kerry and others point to the sublety of actions(at whatever price) and her rushed announcement of her candidacy(?)is Modus operandi for this group. But, heh, I just won't vote for her! Pardon my Interruption...I'm just tired of the whole scene right now. btw...Brian: I wasn't denigrating your youth...just the time frame of your reference. Cheers!

Fair enough. I just don't buy it, and have yet to run across anything that would make me change my mind into thinking that somehow the Clintons value their machine to the point of ensuring that people are killed for it. You'd think that $70 million in two senate campaigns against her would have been able to produce some tangible evidence of it. All you'd have to do is prove that they were behind even one of those deaths and her career would be over. Nobody can do that even with $70 million? Pardon my subsequent skepticism.

I'm sure there will be plenty more of these conversations in the coming year or two, so no need to rush for now

Originally Posted by Cannon Shell

It is simple really. Just tell me what tangible positive effect Senator Clinton has had on the citizens of NY. Maybe I missed somwething but no one that I know that lives in NY can think of one thing.

A short blurb from my Sister-in-Law who works for Corning.

In April 2003, a month after Corning's political action committee gave $10,000 to her re-election campaign, Mrs. Clinton announced legislation that provided hundreds of millions in federal aid to reduce diesel pollution, using, among other things, technology pioneered by Corning. It was one of several Congressional initiatives Mrs. Clinton has pushed that benefit the company.

And in April 2004, Mrs. Clinton began a push to persuade the Chinese government to relax tariffs on Corning fiber optics products, inviting the Chinese ambassador to her office and personally asking President Bush for help in the matter. One month after the beginning of that ultimately successful effort, Corning's chairman, James Houghton, held a fund-raiser at his home that collected tens of thousands of dollars for her re-election campaign....

Corning ... and its employees contributed $137,000 from the time she was elected in 2000 through the end of 2005...

So business got a lot better and the workers felt very gratified. First Democrat to ever receive money from Corning. Heck, 10,000 bucks, they just loaded her up didnt they Cannon? Drop in the bucket compared to what Rep. received from this company. BTW, Clinton intitiated the contact after reading about the problem and before any money came in for her re-election. So you did not benefit and no one you know has... I guess that covers NY.

Again it is very easy to criticize and not find anything positive about the party or person you dont particularly like. So we play this game of destruction instead of asking about anything positive. Which is exactly why politicians use Ads to slay opponents, instead of stating what they have done and will do. Its much easier to bust a bridge apart than to build one. Thats why I hate politics. Because as one reads this thread, it is clear that kicking is easier than applying a cast.

Its the same thing Dems do with Iraq. And your plan? Oh... the plans start to arise after Bush has made a decision about how to clean up a mess. But first all we do is just scream about the mess, with now idea how to clean the mess up.
Just leave Iraq immediately. Quite a plan... Very well thought out. Less well thought out than the plan to send only 120,000 troops in the first place, when 350,000 were recommended by a number of Generals. How many Democrats stood up and said this is clearly not enough troops after voting yes...?
I prefer builders, not destroyers. So lets see the smearing continue... because its so damn easy.

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

i suggest you read "inside the clinton white house'......trailer trash in the white house...lmfao...and osama..hes never going to get the popular vote...

[hoovesupsideyourhead]

i like to refer to her as ol beer keg legs...lol

[GPK]

a MILF she is not