So if the R's had nominated a women, you're saying they wouldn't have made mention of their candidate being the first?? I'm not sold on this being a negative talking point for Dems. It's only "negative" because the Republicans didn't do it first.

 

When their best talking point is that its a first it's not good.

She became a senator in 2000. You're probably disregarding her ever growing experience with her steady involvement from the late 60's until then and now with a multitude of various political activities that only widened her resume.

 

No doubt her association to Bill played an instrumental role in her career advancement, but some would suggest, Bill included, that his association with her was also instrumental in his career advancements.

 

It's apparent to anyone making a fair assessment that they have both complimented each other's careers, and to suggest that her strides were merely a result of sharing the same bed is a shallow disrespectful commentary towards women in power that serves only to keep a shameful discriminating attitude alive of inequality.

 

In the year 2016 we're better than that, aren't we?

 

Some of us.

^ Ah, but my below-par Congressman did not. Candidate Clinton did.

 

In many respects, she is like President Obama. He could walk on water and there would be a host of critics from the right who would complain that it was heavy water.

 

Everyone of those are somebody else legislation she jumped on. All her bills died in committee. So her decades of leadership was basically riding someone else's coattails agreeing with their ideas. Here is her bills. Quite a in depth list of nothing for our dollar.

 

Hillary Clinton, former Senator for New York - GovTrack.us

^ Are you seriously wanting to compare her lifetime of accomplishments to that of her opposition candidate?

^ Are you seriously wanting to compare her lifetime of accomplishments to that of her opposition candidate?

 

You never heard me say Trump is qualified to be POTUS. I said he would be better than her. I realize that's not saying much. She has lived her life on the public dole stealing and pandering millions of dollars into her pocket using her position accepting payment for contracts and influence. Trump was never my guy but i'll vote for him before I elect a unscrupulous traitor for hire like Hillary. We deserve better than the politics of the elite. Same old, same old crap recycled, re-branded, and regurgitated. It's time to go a different direction.

She became a senator in 2000. You're probably disregarding her ever growing experience with her steady involvement from the late 60's until then and now with a multitude of various political activities that only widened her resume.

 

No doubt her association to Bill played an instrumental role in her career advancement, but some would suggest, Bill included, that his association with her was also instrumental in his career advancements.

 

It's apparent to anyone making a fair assessment that they have both complimented each other's careers, and to suggest that her strides were merely a result of sharing the same bed is a shallow disrespectful commentary towards women in power that serves only to keep a shameful discriminating attitude alive of inequality.

 

In the year 2016 we're better than that, aren't we?

 

Seems you're the sexist, my opinion has nothing to do with gender. I would feel the same way if Bill and Hillary switched histories. Different relationships but I feel the same way about GW and Jeb Bush as well as Bobby and Teddy Kennedy, among others. Your attitude does tell me we are not ready for a woman president. It will be interesting as I switch to being a sexist after 8 years of being a racist.

You never heard me say Trump is qualified to be POTUS. I said he would be better than her. I realize that's not saying much. She has lived her life on the public dole stealing and pandering millions of dollars into her pocket using her position accepting payment for contracts and influence. Trump was never my guy but i'll vote for him before I elect a unscrupulous traitor for hire like Hillary. We deserve better than the politics of the elite. Same old, same old crap recycled, re-branded, and regurgitated. It's time to go a different direction.

 

I'm with you on the third party thing. Have been for a while. Just not with you on the Trump will be better thing. Not seeing it at all.

^ Ah, but my below-par Congressman did not. Candidate Clinton did.

 

In many respects, she is like President Obama. He could walk on water and there would be a host of critics from the right who would complain that it was heavy water.

 

Seems you're the sexist, my opinion has nothing to do with gender. I would feel the same way if Bill and Hillary switched histories. Different relationships but I feel the same way about GW and Jeb Bush as well as Bobby and Teddy Kennedy, among others. Your attitude does tell me we are not ready for a woman president. It will be interesting as I switch to being a sexist after 8 years of being a racist.

 

In your post that prompted this exchange you said:

 

"Why not? Sleeping with a president seems to be the only qualification valued by the left these days."

 

Insinuating that this was Hillary's only qualification, and that the left required nothing more...and now you're considering me the sexist and claiming that your comment had nothing to gender as if you weren't suggesting that she got ahead by who she slept with.

 

You really can't run from your words, and nothing that you say can possibly make anyone with any sense buy your logic regarding me.

 

If you'd really like to see your original comment drift on by without notice, continuing to pile more unfounded nonsense on top of it is not likely to help.

 

If you're a reflection of the attitudes of the conservative right, you're not doing much to give them a very appealing image. I'd venture to say that you are an embarrassment to them for sound minded rational conservatives typically display far more intelligence than you are exuding.

 

You've put yourself in this corner, these type of responses will only keep you there.

 

It's a pretty simple equation:

 

Lack of substance + Lack of substance = More Lack of substance

I have no desire to run from my words. I strongly stand behind them. I just find it interesting and quite a bit funny that you assigned it to gender. But then again, I'm sure you consider yourself enlightened. It also appears you are unable to debate without insulting. Sad.

You never heard me say Trump is qualified to be POTUS. I said he would be better than her. I realize that's not saying much. She has lived her life on the public dole stealing and pandering millions of dollars into her pocket using her position accepting payment for contracts and influence. Trump was never my guy but i'll vote for him before I elect a unscrupulous traitor for hire like Hillary. We deserve better than the politics of the elite. Same old, same old crap recycled, re-branded, and regurgitated. It's time to go a different direction.

 

While everything you say about Hillary may be and probably is true, the fact that you try to couch it from the standpoint that Donald Trump is the actual candidate WITH scruples is what makes it hard to swallow. Just stop with that. It's insulting. For all your bile against Hillary, there's just as much mud to throw on Trump that sticks.

 

Again, vote a third party and you can actually look at yourself in the mirror, since you won't be engaged in the silly tit-for-tat D v. R garbage and attempting to prop up one horrible candidate as a strong counterbalance to another horrible candidate.

I have no desire to run from my words. I strongly stand behind them. I just find it interesting and quite a bit funny that you assigned it to gender. But then again, I'm sure you consider yourself enlightened. It also appears you are unable to debate without insulting. Sad.

 

Suit yourself to strongly stand behind your comment, and you are correct about my response to you being insulting. When it comes to the art of diplomacy I don't have a handle on how to sweetly comment in the face of all out rubbish. I tend to call it like it is without mincing my words.

 

Also, you are trying to make some point here that your comment wasn't offensive to women, and that it is I who is making it about gender when it was you who clearly expressed the archaic notion that Hillary got to where she is by who she slept with. If that doesn't sound like a straight forward typical misogynistic comment, I don't know what does, or how you can now try to make it seem like it wasn't.

While everything you say about Hillary may be and probably is true, the fact that you try to couch it from the standpoint that Donald Trump is the actual candidate WITH scruples is what makes it hard to swallow. Just stop with that. It's insulting. For all your bile against Hillary, there's just as much mud to throw on Trump that sticks.

 

Again, vote a third party and you can actually look at yourself in the mirror, since you won't be engaged in the silly tit-for-tat D v. R garbage and attempting to prop up one horrible candidate as a strong counterbalance to another horrible candidate.

 

Jim you must not have seen my post in the other thread. I never said Trump was qualified or the guy. I'd vote for him before Hillary because he's better than her. That's not saying much. I just don't want her to get rewarded for her past behavior.

Edited July 31, 201610 yr by Fear the Nation