Hillary Clinton: just because she deserves her own thread
POSTED BY: SIGNYM
UPDATED: Saturday, September 27, 2025 01:07
VIEWED: 114591
PAGE 7 of 46
Quote:Dr. Paul Craig Roberts didn't say it, but he did quote it a year ago:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
G-STOOGE, you just lied through an entire post. Too bad you can't quote yourself to demonstrate your points. Wow. A poster who can't even quote itself about what it said. That's quite a novelty. In fact, I think it's the first time I've ever seen that here, and that's saying something.
Well done!
Oh, and just as an aside... I'm not about to get into an extended argument about the various ways that you lied about what you yourself said. Since you can't be bothered to stand behind your own words, what's the point?
--------------
You can't build a nation with bombs. You can't create a society with guns.
Quote:www.paulcraigroberts.org/2015/03/18/republicans-party-death-guest-colu
Republicans Are The Party Of Death — Guest Column by Pat Buchanan
Like myself, Pat Buchanan has given up on Republicans. We have reached the point where even a crazed, corrupt Hillary is better than a Republican.
Everyone who votes Republican is voting for Nuclear War and the end of the world. There is not one ounce of sense or humanity in the Republican Party.
mn-pat-buchanan/
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Republicans traditionally love war, and so does Hillary. Only Bernie would try to avoid it.
She talks of "smart power," which is essentially constant permawar forever. That's the dream of the 1%, and they are who she serves.
Now that Bernie is pretty much done, we will have permawar forever. Good job, sheep.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:"Smart power" means don't let hot-heads and stupid-asses decide military policy. Hillary might be unwilling to let a bunch of angry, dim-bulb Admirals and Generals ruin the next eight years of her life.
Originally posted by reaverfan:
Republicans traditionally love war, and so does Hillary. . . .
She talks of "smart power," which is essentially constant permawar forever. That's the dream of the 1%, and they are who she serves.
. . . we will have permawar forever. Good job, sheep.
I can't prove it but it’s possible that Hillary is cynical about the Pentagon’s truthfulness and competence. She might not trust the Pentagon to solve her problems, since she has seen how it has, instead, created enormous problems for all Presidents since WWII. For the amount of money poured into the military and the amount of time Presidents have to take to managing it, there is not much achieved by it in the last 70 years. The Pentagon took credit for the end of the Cold War, but those guys are liars and Hillary knows it.
www.ushistory.org/us/59e.asp
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
SIG, thanks for the laugh. You know, trying to paint G as the liar here when everybody knows it's you and 1kiki.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
"I look forward to many more Republican Presidents being elected in the 21st Century because Democrats can't remember how terrible all previous Republicans were while they can remember how terrible the Democratic candidate is."
That's because Democratic party voters are too stupid to run a Tea-Party style revolution. Leading to Hillary. And Republicans are so stupid they make populist promises they never intend to fulfill. Leading to Donald.
IF democrats were smarter, they'd lean on the party so that it would actually represent THEM, and not be distracted by some concocted Goldberg-style phantom enemy to keep people focused on 'them'. Because, when it gets down to it, Donald is far less likely to get us into a war. So, what advantage is there to voting for Hillary? Instead democrats, like you, choose a 'side' to give their vote to, whether or nor that 'side' will do you, them, the country, or the plant, any good.
http://www.salon.com/2016/04/27/democrats_this_is_why_you_need_to_fear
_hillary_clinton_the_ny_times_is_absolutely_right_shes_a_bigger_hawk_than_the_republicanse/
Democrats, this is why you need to fear Hillary Clinton: The NY Times is absolutely right — she’s a bigger hawk than the Republicans
SAGAN: We are releasing vast quantities of carbon dioxide, increasing the greenhouse effect. It may not take much to destabilize the Earth's climate, to convert this heaven, our only home in the cosmos, into a kind of hell.
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Just because it looks very unlikely that Bernie will win the nomination this particular time, that doesn't mean that a different candidate won't be able to succeed with a similar platform and strategy.
Originally posted by 1kiki:
IF democrats were smarter, they'd lean on the party so that it would actually represent THEM, and not be distracted by some concocted Goldberg-style phantom enemy to keep people focused on 'them'.
And if the Sanders supporters committed to the political revolution devote their energy after this election to figuring out how to reach Bernie’s "poor people (who) don't vote," that could be a revolution.
www.vox.com/2016/4/25/11497822/sanders-political-revolution-vote
Quote:Third parties don’t prosper in the USA at any level of government. That was a flaw built into the Constitution and the state constitutions carry the same flaw. There are multiply ways to deal with the flaw (join one of a dozen third parties), but the better way is to choose one of two sides. Even better would be revising all the Constitutions.
Instead democrats, like you, choose a 'side' to give their vote to, whether or nor that 'side' will do you, them, the country, or the plant, any good.
Quote:I will just repeat myself: It’s possible that Hillary is cynical about the Pentagon’s truthfulness, usefulness and competence. She might not trust the Pentagon to solve her problems, since she has seen how it has created enormous problems for all Presidents since WWII. For the amount of money poured into the military by Congress and the amount of time Presidents have to take to manage the money at that grossly overfeed Dept of War, there is not much achieved by it in 70 years.
Democrats, this is why you need to fear Hillary Clinton: The NY Times is absolutely right — she’s a bigger hawk than the Republicans.
Hillary might be unwilling to let a bunch of fat dimwit Admirals and Generals ruin her next eight years. Unfortunately, Hillary will certainly allow them their drones and their oh so "special" forces missions. She can't take away all their toys paid by Congress, but she won't be so big a fool as to allow them to "surge" 50,000 troops and private security contractors into the Middle East. http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/as-obama-sends-more-troops-gian
t-shadow-army-of-contractors-set-to-grow-in-afghanistan
Maybe Hillary is following the same disgraceful strategy as the North Korea Kims: talk crazy and belligerently, yet don't actually invade South Korea. And the strategy has kept the Kim dynasty in power for generations! North Korea is weak so generations of Kims have to act this way to hide its weakness. Hillary is a woman so she has to talk hawkishly or she will be called too weak to rule.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
I love Bernie and am glad he pulled Hilary far to the left. But TWO you have to remember. He is a socialist and most democrats are not. TWO, 1kiki is a communist. She worships Putin and she and SIG have been preaching Russia is the way to go since long before I got here. So mixed into her bitching about everything WEST, is her love for Russia and what it stands for. Because of that she can't possibly be appreciative or unbiased about anything happening in America. In all my time here it has been thread after thread of negative posting about this country. Her perspectives are awash in Russian propaganda, and a distain for the WEST.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:"two" is when I login from verizon.net dsl, while "second" is my gmail.com login. I no longer have dsl.
Originally posted by THGRRI:
I love Bernie and am glad he pulled Hilary far to the left. But TWO you have to remember. He is a socialist and most democrats are not. TWO, 1kiki is a communist.
It is a weak-minded politician who is actually "pulled" by an opponent. What truly happens with the strong-minded politician is a copying of only the words of whatever is working for their opponent. After the election you discover what a politician really believes, but there is always a tremendous amount of obfuscation and secrecy about what is really happening when you're dealing with a politician. Check out the story of Lincoln. He took his own sweet time deciding to emancipate the slaves. He put a condition on it: only applying to a state that did not end its rebellion against the Union by January 1, 1863. Even the best President was in no hurry to do what was inevitable. His delaying screwed up America for a century after he was murdered, thanks to his successor President Andrew Johnson's misrule.
Lincoln didn't even get the 13th Amendment out until January 31, 1865, which I take as a sure sign Lincoln didn't believe he, uniquely, would ever die.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
What, if anything, is factually wrong with the article?
you had NOT A SINGLE THING TO SAY ABOUT THE FACTS LISTED IN THE ARTICLE.
So Sig, kiki, are you guys prepared to side with the predictions made by this article you keep going on about? If not, then kindly pipe down.
From the article:
Quote:
Hillary Clinton... would likely be the most reckless president in American history... Hillary’s arrogant self-confidence is likely to result in over-reach that ends in conflict between NATO and Russia. Considering the extraordinary destructive force of nuclear weapons, Hillary as president could mean the end of life on earth.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Any government designed to end life on earth at the command of one person has much bigger problems than Hillary Clinton. I would suggest a redesign of such a government. Check out the website "Today I Found Out" on how screwed up a world is when only one person is standing between life and total destruction:
Originally posted by kpo:
Considering the extraordinary destructive force of nuclear weapons, Hillary as president could mean the end of life on earth.
www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2013/05/vasili-arkhipov-the-man-who-s
aved-the-world/
What happens to the world when the "one person" is home with the flu? Does the world die?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME