Jump to content

Just watched an hour of the Sessions confirmation hearing

All Tell

By All Tell
in Kentucky / National Politics

 Share

Recommended Posts

formerkywrestler

formerkywrestler

Posted
Posted
I've stated in every thread I do not want conflict of interests regardless of party. I just find an interesting how important it is to you now that the person who won the election isn't who you had in mind.

 

I definitely did not want Trump to win but I by no means wanted Hillary to win either. Am I allowed to criticize these potential conflicts of interests?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • Replies 285
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Posted Images

Clyde

Clyde

Posted
Posted
I've stated in every thread I do not want conflict of interests regardless of party. I just find an interesting how important it is to you now that the person who won the election isn't who you had in mind.

 

Come on, chief.

 

I almost didn't even vote in this election due to two crappy options. I held my nose and voted HRC STRICTLY to keep Mr Trump from winning. I've stated that many times on here. Both were going to be problems once they took over 1600. I shouldn't have to post a damn disclaimer every time I post an article or express an opinion. Let's debate what I post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LIPTON BASH

LIPTON BASH

Posted
Posted
Come on, chief.

 

I almost didn't even vote in this election due to two crappy options. I held my nose and voted HRC STRICTLY to keep Mr Trump from winning. I've stated that many times on here. Both were going to be problems once they took over 1600. I shouldn't have to post a damn disclaimer every time I post an article or express an opinion. Let's debate what I post.

 

It isn't about any of that. I just didn't see much worry from you on the Clinton foundations obvious conflict of interest while she was SOS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clyde

Clyde

Posted
Posted
It isn't about any of that. I just didn't see much worry from you on the Clinton foundations obvious conflict of interest while she was SOS.

 

Look harder. Or remember what I said recently. I don't advocate the killing of puppies even though I have never posted it in the past. Shouldn't have to when it's obvious.

 

Debate what I post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LIPTON BASH

LIPTON BASH

Posted
Posted
Look harder. Or remember what I said recently. I don't advocate the killing of puppies even though I have never posted it in the past. Shouldn't have to when it's obvious.

 

Debate what I post.

 

My point being if conflict interest is so important to you how could you hold your nose and vote for her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clyde

Clyde

Posted
Posted

It was not a good day for Education nominee DeVos. She seemed to not know some of the basic laws/concepts of education. Didn't seem to know that there was a federal law regarding students with disabilities. Didn't seem to understand the concept of "proficiency vs improvement." Said she was not part of a controversial board even though her name appeared on their literature. She said it was a typo. Said student loan debt has increased by 980% over the last 8 years when it's about 100%.

 

She just came off as unaware of what goes on in the world of public education.

 

The line of questioning from Sen Warren was in poor taste. She was fine questioning her about her experience in running a financial institution or running something with a huge budget but she was COMPLETELY out of line insinuating that due to her family's wealth and the fact she personally never had to use student loans that she was somehow unqualified.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
LIPTON BASH

LIPTON BASH

Posted
Posted
It was not a good day for Education nominee DeVos. She seemed to not know some of the basic laws/concepts of education. Didn't seem to know that there was a federal law regarding students with disabilities. Didn't seem to understand the concept of "proficiency vs improvement." Said she was not part of a controversial board even though her name appeared on their literature. She said it was a typo. Said student loan debt has increased by 980% over the last 8 years when it's about 100%.

 

She just came off as unaware of what goes on in the world of public education.

 

The line of questioning from Sen Warren was in poor taste. She was fine questioning her about her experience in running a financial institution or running something with a huge budget but she was COMPLETELY out of line insinuating that due to her family's wealth and the fact she personally never had to use student loans that she was somehow unqualified.

 

Eliminate the department I hope it's her only role.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Clyde

Clyde

Posted
Posted
It's very well documented on this site I voted for Gary Johnson.

 

Couldn't remember.

 

I would never assume that a person who voted for Donald J Trump was "OK" with sexually assaulting women, generalizing about dark skin people, etc. They voted for DJT for a reason or many reasons.

 

Same for me with HRC. Well, really just one reason. She wasn't DJT. Doesn't mean I am "cool" with any particular thing she did/stands for.

 

It's why it's silly for posters to always say "well you must be OK with.... because you voted for ....."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using the site you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use Policies.

  I accept