Think about all of these Republican candidates praising Hillary Clinton. They didn't have to. They could have remained silent. But they lauded the former Secretary of State, thereby making suspect every criticism they will lob against her now that they're running for the presidency.
Question: Were they lying about how they felt toward Hillary then? Or when they criticize her now, are they lying? Either way, they're, well, either pandering political hacks or pandering political hacks.
Go HERE to read Infidel753's assessment on Thursday's Q&A Donaldpalooza!
From Business Insider:
Hillary Clinton [wasn't] onstage to defend herself, but she still managed to mock many of the candidates appearing in the first Republican presidential debates on Thursday night.
Clinton's campaign set up a press filing room for reporters covering the debates at her headquarters in Brooklyn, New York. The walls of the room were covered with posters showing past statements from several of the Republican candidates praising Clinton.
There were quotes from front-runner Donald Trump, former Gov. Jeb Bush of Florida, businesswoman Carly Fiorina, Sen. Marco Rubio of Florida, and former Gov. Rick Perry of Texas.
 |
| Hillary pwns GOP presidential candidates! |
28 comments:
Nobody hates Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Carly Fiorina or Rick Perry.
Although the Texans do make fun of Rick.
Sorry Donnie, you're in a class by yourself.
Decent American republicans are the key to the future. That and young people, a demographic that was not represented in this debate. I think the democratic party already has its shit together.
These are the smart ones that know that to defeat Hillary they must acknowledge her station.
Maybe Fiorina would do a good job. She's no Meg Whitman. Maybe Geraldine Ferraro would have been a good vice president and later become the first female president.
Most likely we all would be sitting a little bit prettier if she had.
Republican women! Free yourselves!
Does Trump Have A Hidden Agenda?...
Wouldn't that be the next great hashtag?
#republicanwomenfreeyourselves
They were lying then, and they are lying now.
Interesting use of political jiu-jitsu. The Republicans are so steeped in the tactics of insult and attack-doggery it will be hard for them to shift gears and respond, if she continues to use such quotes.
By the way, Trump got disinvited from the RedState Gathering for his "blood" remark about Megyn Kelly. Only The Donald could manage to be too gross even for Erick Erickson.
Latest polls post-debate:
CLEVELAND, Ohio: A Wall Street Journal report suggests that despite critics’ opinions predicting GOP frontrunner Donald Trump’s poll numbers would fall, two early – though unscientific – polls predict that may be wrong.
“Time Magazine found that Mr. Trump took 47% of nearly 55,000 votes. Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL)80% of Florida was in second place with just 10%. The Drudge Report’s poll found more than half of nearly 362,000 voters favored Mr. Trump, well above everyone else,” the Wall Street Journal noted.
After Frank Luntz’s made his opinion on Trump’s performance suggesting “tonight his act wore thin,” conservative talk radio host Rush Limbaugh stood up for Trump, and instead went after Fox News’ performance.
Donnie has the "I made my housemaid score drugs for me" vote all tied up!
So Donnie's performance at the Q&A and post-Q&A didn't hurt him as some predicted. He's still beloved by the TGOP. Look at how quickly the Megyn Kelly lovers went after her and threw their support to the misogynist. (But who's surprised by the nativist old white males in the TGOP base who, when given the choice between supporting a beautiful blonde vs. a loud-mouth bully, will always choose the bully?). Megyn Kelly is now seen as a traitor who, along with FAUX NOOZ, is trying to destroy the TGOP's hero, Donald "Megyn had blood coming out from wherever" Trump.
I may actually run out of popcorn.
Call me nuts but Trump has found a creative, albeit disgusting, way to tip the election of 2016 decidedly to the democrats. All that really is left (which may come later) is for him to announce a third party candidacy.
Will anyone really be surprised if he does?
Ben Carson said this...
"What we do in order to get the information we need is our business and I wouldn't necessarily be broadcasting to everybody what we're going to do. … We've gotten into this mindset of fighting politically correct wars. If we don't tie the generals hands behind their backs, they will be extremely effectively."
showing his total ignorance of the Geneva Conventions of which the USA is a signatory. Yet the TGOPers think this political novice would make a great president. What he said above is what one would expect from someone who knows nothing about the Geneva Conventions. Yet the TGOP has no problem with supporting a guy for the presidency who is that ignorant on such critical matters. Carson, who is a dedicated pro-lifer, believes in torture.
What are the Geneva Conventions?
The Geneva Conventions provide an agreed-upon framework of legal protections to safeguard soldiers, civilians, and prisoners during wartime. The original Geneva Convention, drafted in 1864, dealt with the treatment of wounded troops. Shortly after the Second World War, it was expanded to include military personnel shipwrecked at sea, as well as prisoners of war and civilians under enemy control. The Conventions have been ratified by nearly every country in the world—194 states in total—including the United States. Countries that violate the Geneva Conventions, including Common Article Three, can be held accountable for charges of war crimes.
What is Common Article Three?
This article of the Geneva Conventions bars torture, cruel, inhumane, and degrading treatment, as well as outrages against the human dignity of prisoners of war, or POWs. Until recently it remained unclear whether the article applied to CIA interrogators, located overseas, who were questioning high-ranking members of al-Qaeda and other so-called “unlawful enemy combatants.” In July 2006, the Supreme Court ruled in its Hamdan decision that this article does indeed apply to top terror suspects detained in CIA-run prisons as well as at Guantanamo Bay. "Quoting [Common Article Three] is like quoting the Bible for international lawyers," says Peter Danchin, a Columbia University legal expert.
Dr. Carson either never heard of the Geneva Conventions (however,ignorance of the law is no excuse), or he isn't smart enough on this issue to understand what it means. In his statement above, he advocates breaking the law.
Good doctor; dumb politician.
Out of respect for Dr. Carson's medical abilities I think uninformed politician is more a more accurate/appropriate description.
If your "dumb politician" description is true one can only believe it is willful dumbness, choosen solely on misguided political calculations.
Thesaurus Antonyms:
Adj. 1. dumb - slow to learn or understand; lacking intellectual acuity;
In his answer about torture, he complained about "politically correct wars." What did he mean? Does he even know? Are politically correct wars the sort of wars where coudntries abide by the treaties (laws) they signed? Taken in context, that's what he's talking about.Does he believe that the Geneva Conventions, which prohibit torture, are some sort of political correctness that prevents armies from winning wars? Doesn't he understand that if the USA breaks the law on torture, every military man and woman is put in danger of having torture applied to him and her.
Carson was a brilliant surgeon, but that brilliance apparently didn't translate into political acuity. He's demonstrated his naivete too many times.
Remember his inane comment about how being in prison makes people gay? Where's the brilliance there? Or in his statement that the ACA is worse than slavery and 9/11? That the Obama administration is just like Nazi Germany? Or comparing gays to people who engage in beastiality? Or in 2014 when he told FAUX NOOZ that President Obama might declare martial law and cancel the 2016 elections so he can continue being president?
Those are the sort of statements paranoid conspiracy nuts engage in, not potential world leaders. Dr. Carson doesn't understand that simple truth. He's popular with the TP base because they believe that nonsense as well.
OT: Shaw, you're driving koo-koos nuts. Keep up the good fight.
RN, the thought of Donald being a plant had crossed my mind, too. Don't think I put a lot of credence in it, but then I'm generally averse to conspiracy theories. If it is the case tho, what do you do about it especially if he runs third party? There will still be a goodly percentage of people on the right voting for him because they're buying the sizzle.
who's surprised by the nativist old white males in the TGOP base who, when given the choice between supporting a beautiful blonde vs. a loud-mouth bully, will always choose the bully?
They're just shifting gears from 6 and a half years of racism to the misogyny needed to confront Hillary.
Re: CARSON: A typically snide, shallow, pretentious RIGHT WING attempt to gain advantage using smear tactics. "Lying with Facts" is unfortunately what political discourse has become.
How few have any appetite –– let alone energy -- to dig behind and beneath CARSON'S tendentious displays of selected, overemphasized, often hideously distorted "facts" to find the TRUTH?
Thankfully, Carson will NEVER be president.
I don't put a lot of credence in conspiracy theories ether Kevin.
If true thee is not much if anything you can do.except to accept another 4 and possibly 8 more years os executive governance by dems.
I don't believe Trump is a Democratic mole. This is just Trump being Trump. Never invoke implausible eleven-dimensional chess to explain what ego and vulgarity can explain far more straightforwardly -- especially where Trump is concerned.
In any case, the real significance of the Trump phenomenon lies not in Trump himself but in his popularity with the Republican base. If that base consisted of normal humans, Trump's vulgarity and the fatuosity of his rants would repulse them as much as they repulse us, and his support would be down around the 1% level like the no-hopers at the kids' table debate. It doesn't much matter why Trump has all this bullshit coming out of his wherever. What matters is that the knuckle-dragging Fox-addled inbreds are gobbling it up so eagerly. Trump's popularity is a symptom of something gone very wrong with the party.
Okay, I agree with political naivete. An apt compromise of terms.
Do you think Nader was a republican plant? Makes about as much sense as Trump being a democratic plant.
"Trump said Kelly, who moderated Thursday's GOP debate, had "blood coming out of her eyes, blood coming out of her wherever."
The remarks made during a phone interview with CNN prompted conservative commentator Erick Erickson to withdraw his invitation for Trump — who has been the front-runner in recent polls — to appear at his RedState Gathering.
"I just don't want someone on stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal," Erickson wrote on the RedState website Friday night. "It just was wrong."
In response, Trump's campaign issued the following statement: "This is just another example of weakness through being politically correct.
A female Trump campaign staffer told NBC News that she wasn't personally offended by Trump's remarks about Kelly.
"He handles men and women with the same amount of equal intensity," said Trump's Iowa co-chair, Tana Goertz."
What Tana Goertz really meant to say is that Trump handles men and women with the same amount of barbaric, coarse, and swinish intensity. It has nothing to do with politically correct or incorrectness. It has to do with a man of low breeding and loutish conduct who's used to having his lackeys lick his boots and prop up his perpetually flaccid self-esteem every time someone criticizes him.
He's shown the world how easily a female talking head can provoke him. Imagine this walking talking disaster of a human being dealing with world leaders and nuclear weapons.
Nader was at least a man of some degree of integrity. Trump has little to none.
Conspiracy theories are fun to entertain, breaks up the boredom and passes time. And since Trump has been a supporter of single payer, advocated for HRC in 2008, and refuses to disavow a third party candidacy it makes it all the more fun.
Bottom line, he helps HRC by his remarks and hurts the GOP. If he goes third party he has to know he elects HRC. Or whoever the dems nominate.
RN: If he goes third party he has to know he elects HRC.
But it keeps him at the center of attention and gives him power. And that's what he mostly cares about.
Yes, the power to elect a democrat to the white house. I rest my case.
RN, I agree with your bottom line. In fact, the crazier the GOP candidate, the better it is for the deems, no matter who their candidate is. The power behind the republicans know this also. That's why most likely, Jeb will be the candidate.
Well they pulled his invitation to the convention sponsored by Red State . The site is run by Salem Communications which also runs Townhall.com and a lot of religious radio.
They don't have much good to say about Trump:
Donald Trump: The Weapon of Choice for Liberals
Donald Trump is not a Winner. Nor is he a Conservative
Trump and the New Know-Nothings Threaten the Death of the GOP
So the unwinding begins. Faux Snooze has said, enough and now another major outlet cuts him loose.
It's the night of the long knives.
Does he go quiet (not likely) or third party. They have a problem.
While Trump as the presidential candidate benefits the Democrats, right now the GOP is reaping huge press benefits from Trump. Some people have said, any press, even bad press, is better than no press. I have heard that more people watched the debate than watched the World Series. That is millions of people listening to democratic policies and Obama be trashed for an hour and a half. Republicans can't buy that kind of coverage and they have Trump to thank for it. I think they are glad they have Trump and when the time comes, they will "move him out of the way". He will never be their candidate. Third party candidate? That they may not be able to prevent.
Well Jerry, Obama's policies and democratic party performance has not been exactly stellar. Not as dismal as some of GWB's policies perhaps but certainly there was (is) room from improvement.
Pointing out what they believe to be poor and ineffective policy, misguided
direction, and poor or ineffective leadership is what opposing parties do. Hopefully it is accurate and fully honest, but we both know that isn't the case from either party. That's politics.
Perhaps it is time for the DNC to get moving on some national debates and turn a spotlight on party's candidates. And yes I realize it may be exposing the dem hopefuls to scrutiny earlier than they or the party wants.
Some people have bad hair days. Donald Trump is having a bad hair life. Have you ever noticed that?
What I love the most about The Donald - and why I cherish his presence in the national train wreck so completely - is the man's genius at being clueless. In fact, if lacking in self awareness were considered a human virtue, Trump would have received the Nobel Prize decades ago. It's bad enough that this nitwit takes himself so seriously, he's delusional enough to think that intelligent people take him with anything other than a grain of moldy salt. It really is rather touching and pathetic when you think about it.
"Perhaps it is time for the DNC to get moving on some national debates and turn a spotlight on party's candidates."
It is!
Post a Comment