RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message


LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 12:55:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

And this is because of Trump?
Okay, so what exactly did he do to create these prosperous conditions?

I'm pretty sure that what we are seeing is Wall Street anticipating deregulation, and trying to make some money off of the bubble before it bursts again.


Trump is the catalyst for rolling controlling Congress and that is the tool for rolling back Obama era regulation and taxes and since that is good for business and my 401k then it is good for our 3+ points in GPA gain this year and your 401K too.

I believe these were his promises to the American People. He being President Trump who won the election last fall.


Exactly... it's all speculation and has no basis in anything Trump has actually done.


No, he really did win the election and these things really happened after he really won the election. Cause and effect

Actually, Wall Street is continuing an upswing that has lasted 6 years and counting.


Inaccurate. The rate at which we maintain succeeding record highs since the election has only occurred after the election and after MSNBC and CNN suggested stocks will tank because of this election. Surprise!




heavyblinker -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 12:56:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

quote:

And this is because of Trump?
Okay, so what exactly did he do to create these prosperous conditions?

I'm pretty sure that what we are seeing is Wall Street anticipating deregulation, and trying to make some money off of the bubble before it bursts again.


Trump is the catalyst for rolling controlling Congress and that is the tool for rolling back Obama era regulation and taxes and since that is good for business and my 401k then it is good for our 3+ points in GPA gain this year and your 401K too.

I believe these were his promises to the American People. He being President Trump who won the election last fall.


Exactly... it's all speculation and has no basis in anything Trump has actually done.


No, he really did win the election and these things really happened after he really won the election. Cause and effect.


Winning an election isn't about smart policy, it's about getting votes from people, most of them hopelessly uninformed.




BoscoX -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 12:57:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE

Inaccurate. The rate at which we maintain succeeding record highs since the election has only occurred after the election and after MSNBC and CNN suggested stocks will tank because of this election. Surprise!


Said "end of the world" preaching at leftist media outlets continues to this day




heavyblinker -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 12:58:01 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
Actually, Wall Street is continuing an upswing that has lasted 6 years and counting.


This is true, but there is also a Trump bubble happening right now.




BoscoX -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 12:58:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Winning an election isn't about smart policy, it's about getting votes from people, most of them hopelessly uninformed.


HELLO Barack Obama




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:02:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

quote:

ORIGINAL: LTE


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam


quote:

ORIGINAL: bounty44






much like the made up gingrich story,



What made-up Gingrich story?
The one where he is a serial adulterer or the one where he was fucking around on wife #1 with eventual wife #2 and brought #1 papers to sign regarding the divorce while she was in the hospital fighting cancer (which she did survive and I never claimed otherwise).
In the mean time, he was preaching "Family Values".


You keep bringing that up. Do you have a humiliation fetish?
I'll be happy to oblige it......AGAIN[:D]



That is a made up story. But I do give you points for creativity.

http://www.factcheck.org/2011/12/the-gingrich-divorce-myth/

From a VERY sympathetic (to Newt) source.

While she was still in the hospital, according to Howell, “Newt came up there with his yellow legal pad, and he had a list of things on how the divorce was going to be handled. He wanted her to sign it. She was still recovering from surgery, still sort of out of it, and he comes in with a yellow sheet of paper, handwritten, and wants her to sign it.”

Or this one https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/aspects-of-gingrich-divorce-story-distorted/2011/11/17/gIQA8iY4YN_story.html?utm_term=.2e6e81b5ea4b where the story is confirmed and Newt admits that he isn't proud of his adultery.

And this one http://nymag.com/daily/intelligencer/2011/03/newt_gingrich_cheated_on_his_w.html
Which has a nice timeline Let’s remember, Newt famously dumped wife #1 for wife #2 while wife #1 was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. As in literally went to the hospital to present her with divorce papers while she was recovering from surgery for uterine cancer.

He eventually dumped wife #2 for wife #3 shortly after wife #2 was diagnosed with MS back in 1999. And he was having the affair on wife #2 with wife #3 while he was turning the country upside down trying to drive Bill Clinton from office over his affair with Monica Lewinsky.



Wait, wait. You cite these lefty loser sources and then suggest, based only on your fantastical opinion, that he was chasing other women while his poor wife was so sick and that he was evil or something because there were legal matters to attend to or perhaps he only was up there to get a checklist of things she needed done by him for her while she was in the hospital, you think? I think, purely a normal thing to do. And, you also suggest that because his wife has MS that somehow he was supposed to stay married to her when it was not working?

You make me laugh. I like you. Say something else.




bounty44 -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:04:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam

What made-up Gingrich story?
The one where he is a serial adulterer or the one where he was fucking around on wife #1 with eventual wife #2 and brought #1 papers to sign regarding the divorce while she was in the hospital fighting cancer (which she did survive and I never claimed otherwise).
In the mean time, he was preaching "Family Values".

You keep bringing that up. Do you have a humiliation fetish?
I'll be happy to oblige it......AGAIN[:D]


i can only imagine that you think you've ever done so in the first place is a self-justifying delusion you need to tell yourself.

and I "keep bringing it up" because the comrades keep repeating the myths and distortions. and although your version is less toxic, you don't have it quite right either, though I don't doubt your vague language combined with your talent for being right in your own eyes will suffice for you. you even have multiple versions in your response above to LTE for goodness sake.

so:

quote:

The Gingrich Divorce Myth

Did Newt Gingrich ask his former wife to sign divorce papers on her deathbed?

For almost three decades, Newt Gingrich has been dogged by a story that he served his first wife divorce papers while she lay in a hospital bed battling — or in some versions dying from — cancer. It didn’t happen that way.

In fact, Gingrich, the presidential candidate and former House speaker, and his first wife, Jackie Battley, had already separated before she was hospitalized. He had filed for divorce, and she was seeking alimony and custody of their two children. And while Battley had earlier undergone cancer surgery, this time she was in the hospital recovering from surgery to remove a tumor that...was benign. Battley isn’t talking to reporters, but she’s still very much alive...

Divorce Story Origins

The story of the hospital visit started with a lengthy and unflattering profile of Gingrich that was published in Mother Jones magazine in 1984. Author David Osborne reported an anecdote from Gingrich’s former press secretary, Lee Howell, who said that Gingrich wanted his wife to sign off on a written list of divorce terms while she was recovering from surgery. Howell said Battley was “still sort of out of it” at the time…

Update, Dec. 27: In fact, Newt Gingrich had already filed for divorce about two months before the September visit, and Battley was contesting the divorce. Newt Gingrich said the marriage was “irretrievably broken” in a “complaint for divorce” filed with the court on July 14, 1980. Battley (then Jacqueline Gingrich) had been officially served with the divorce suit in July. She filed an answer stating that she had “ample grounds for divorce” but “does not desire one at this time.” She asked for alimony and support, for custody of the children, for a “reasonable division” of property, and for her husband to pay her legal fees in the divorce.


http://www.factcheck.org/2011/12/the-gingrich-divorce-myth/

and

quote:

For almost as long as Newt Gingrich has been in public life, an unflattering story has shadowed him: that as a rising young Republican congressman from Georgia, Gingrich ended his first marriage by serving his wife with divorce papers while she lay in a hospital bed dying of cancer.

The story has been trumpeted by Gingrich’s political opponents, endlessly recycled by the news media and repeated even by would-be allies, including social conservatives, who have long had doubts about the thrice-married former House speaker. As candidate Gingrich has risen to the top of some polls in the past few weeks, the story has inevitably surfaced again. Variations have turned up on MSNBC and in the National Journal, columns and blogs, and two British newspapers in just the past week.

Over the years, Gingrich himself has declined to comment on the story’s details, usually relying on some variation of the comment he made to the New York Times this year: “There are things in my life I’m not proud of, and there are things in my life I’m very proud of.” He has acknowledged having extramarital affairs in the past, however.

Although the thrust of the story about his first divorce is not in dispute — Gingrich’s first wife, Jackie Battley, has said previously that the couple discussed their divorce while she was in the hospital in 1980 — other aspects of it appear to have been distorted through constant retelling.

Most significant, Battley wasn’t dying at the time of the hospital visit; she is alive today. Nor was the divorce discussion in the hospital “a surprise” to Battley, as many accounts have contended. Battley, not Gingrich, had requested a divorce months earlier, according to Jackie Gingrich Cushman, the couple’s second daughter. Further, Gingrich did not serve his wife with divorce papers on the day of his visit (unlike a subpoena, divorce papers aren’t typically “served”).

Gingrich’s marriage to Battley had been troubled for many years before it dissolved 31 years ago, both parties have said. Battley, who is seven years older than Gingrich, had been Gingrich’s high school math teacher in Columbus, Ga. They began dating after he graduated and were married in 1962, when Gingrich was 19 and a freshman at Emory University in Atlanta.

In time, the marriage grew contentious, and the couple spent several years in counseling. In spring 1980, Gingrich left her, Battley told The Washington Post in 1985. Around this time, the couple gathered their children, then ages 16 and 13, around the kitchen table at their home in Fairfax County and told them that they intended to divorce, Cushman wrote in a syndicated column in May (none of the family members nor Gingrich would comment for this article).

On his campaign Web site, Gingrich calls the hospital story “a vicious lie. . . . It is completely false.” However, this contradicts comments made repeatedly by Battley in two interviews after their divorce.

The hospital visit took place that summer, several months into their separation. Battley, who was undergoing treatment for uterine cancer, had had two prior surgeries, and Gingrich’s visit occurred a day after a third operation at Emory University Hospital, in which doctors removed a benign tumor, according to Cushman.

As Battley recovered, Gingrich brought the couple’s daughters to the hospital to visit her.

Accounts of what happened next vary in detail, but primary sources agree on a central point: Gingrich wanted to talk divorce with his hospitalized wife.

According to the first published account of the visit — a story by David Osborne in Mother Jones magazine in November 1984 — Gingrich went to Battley’s room with a yellow legal pad on which he had written a list of items related to the handling of the divorce.

Osborne attributed this anecdote to Lee Howell, Gingrich’s former press secretary, whom he quoted as saying: “He wanted her to sign [the list]. She was still recovering from surgery, still sort of out of it, and he comes in with a yellow sheet of paper, handwritten, and wants her to sign it.”

In an interview this week, Osborne said Battley confirmed the story when he interviewed her for his article. He also said Gingrich never explicitly disputed Howell’s account.

In a follow-up story in The Post in early 1985, two months after the Mother Jones story was published, some elements of the story were different. Neither Battley nor Gingrich mentioned a yellow legal pad or a list to be signed in The Post article.

“The two girls came to see me, and said Daddy is downstairs and could he come up,” Battley told Post reporter Lois Romano at the time. “When he got there, he wanted to discuss the terms of the divorce while I was recovering from surgery.”

Osborne said Battley never mentioned that their daughters were in the room when Gingrich began the divorce discussion. “It’s possible that it could have happened on a different day” when the daughters weren’t present, he said.

In any case, Osborne said he’s seen nothing to suggest that what he described 27 years ago is essentially in error.

As Gingrich prepared to run for president this spring, his daughter Jackie Gingrich Cushman offered her take for the first time. In her column, titled “Setting the Record Straight,” she criticized media coverage of the episode, saying it contained “untruths” and “misstatement of facts.”

But Cushman never spelled out what was untrue. Nor did she mention what transpired in the hospital room when she visited her mother as a 13-year-old.

“For the four people involved, [the hospital visit] was one of a million interactions and was not considered a defining event by any of us. . . . As with many divorces, it was hard and painful for all involved, but life continued,” she wrote.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/aspects-of-gingrich-divorce-story-distorted/2011/11/17/gIQA8iY4YN_story.html

and in terms of your "preaching family values"---the story in question here is from 1980 when gingrich was a first year congressman. he didn't become speaker of the house until 14-15 yrs later. you don't think people have done things in their past that they know are wrong? that they have repented of? that although maybe they themselves have failed, they can still hope and work for those values?

yeah, because screams of "hypocrite" are more accurate than understanding the fallible nature of man right?





heavyblinker -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:04:36 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Winning an election isn't about smart policy, it's about getting votes from people, most of them hopelessly uninformed.


HELLO Barack Obama


I'm not going to argue that a lot of people didn't choose Obama for the wrong reasons.
He was still a good president, though.

Trump is already easily the least competent, most absurdly unfit person ever to hold that post.
When we get to the point where his policies actually begin to have a noticeable effect (beyond the already present fear, despair, division, hatred and betrayal of western values), you will understand this.




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:09:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam
Actually, Wall Street is continuing an upswing that has lasted 6 years and counting.


This is true, but there is also a Trump bubble happening right now.



Bubbles are normal. What goes up must come down and always has especially when discussing the economy. But something must always be present to trigger the expansion after the contraction, like that under Obama. One must hope the contraction of that bubble does not last long as it did since 2008 up to President Trump's election. You must also understand that the GDP growth is what we are also talking about when discussing the economy and that is even more important and it was tanked and stagnate until President Trump was elected and started making and signaling changes.




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:17:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

quote:

ORIGINAL: BoscoX


quote:

ORIGINAL: heavyblinker

Winning an election isn't about smart policy, it's about getting votes from people, most of them hopelessly uninformed.


HELLO Barack Obama


I'm not going to argue that a lot of people didn't choose Obama for the wrong reasons.
He was still a good president, though.

Trump is already easily the least competent, most absurdly unfit person ever to hold that post.
When we get to the point where his policies actually begin to have a noticeable effect (beyond the already present fear, despair, division, hatred and betrayal of western values), you will understand this.



As it turns out, with the advent of cable new channels the electorate was well informed, better than ever.

President Obama will be remembered for his expansion of hand outs, suggesting we can "keep our doctors" under the health care plan his attack dog wanted to pass "so we can read it" as well as the failed "shovel ready" projects and suggesting to Putin that he must wait for Obama's second term before President Obama does whatever Putin wanted him to do. Anything else, oh yes, paying Iran to stop their nuclear program and the failed "red line in the sand" he drew to pretend he was forcefully dealing with Syria's killing of civilians in rebel held territory.




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 1:20:33 PM)

The "fear, despair, division, hatred and betrayal of western values" are perpetrated by the left and their attack dog lackeys, CNN, NPR and you can guess the other one. We see this. It is clear for all to see. This is why Trump has and will succeed and be reelected.





bounty44 -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 2:17:35 PM)

im not necessarily convinced of the "re-elect" part of your statement, but wholeheartedly agree with the first part.




AtUrCervix -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 3:23:53 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

look in the mirror, or your posting history:)


I wanna know what my tits and pussy rule is!!!

(I never knew I had such a rule!)


Has it worked well for me?

What are the protocol????

Who has to pay????

How much pussy have I gotten from said rule????

WHY am I using said rule????

WHERE'S THE GAWDAMNED PUSSSSSSSSYYYYYYYYYYY????

(It's nearly Friday....me want me some fucking pussy!!!).




ThatDizzyChick -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 5:23:04 PM)

FR
Fuck you people are funny.




JVoV -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 6:21:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: JVoV
Are you also going to ignore the possibility that Weinstein's scandal may have been something that she needed time to process before making a public statement? She's known him for how long? 20 years or so?

Precisely, they are close friends. That's why the initial silence, until the pressure her own party puts on her to say something. She probably didn't expect her own party to BE THE ONES bringing up her silence.


You seem to think that HRC had no intention of making a statement when she found out about the scandal. Nope. She didn't have any option of not commenting. Even if she were given a heads up about the allegations before they were published, it would have been inappropriate for her to comment at the time. Why? Well, having known him for 20+ years, yet having no experience being sexually harassed or assaulted by Weinstein, she really couldn't have said anything more than "I hope the truth comes out." And too much could be read into that.

Then Weinstein admitted to a certain amount of nonspecific wrong doing. As someone that had known him for so long, there has to be a certain amount of shock. Deja vu, maybe. Taking time to let it sink in, and to compose herself was likely necessary. Or... Possibly the deja vu caused a bit of panic for her. Especially with her name and the DNC directly linked, she may have watched the 2020 election go down the drain too. Ranting for days about "one more bastard man fucking up her life, because he can't keep his dick in his pants". Bill may have had to sleep on the couch, so the Secret Service could protect him and his penis. And it may have taken the weekend for the mood stabilizing drugs, anxiety drugs, and 2 gallons of medical marijuana infused chocolate chip cookie dough ice cream to kick in enough for her to put together a rational statement about much of anything.

Or, she just had other shit to do until Tuesday.




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 7:41:40 PM)

I am so glad she commented. I'm sure the fact that it came after he was fired and now powerless is simply a coincidence. ex Senator Hillary Clinton (DEM NY) is known for prompt action and highly regarded comments. Take the comment on Benghazi being caused by a video and her prompt and uplifting speech at the Dem Election Headquarters before all the "I'm with Her" supporters who stood in line for a victory party and were handed a "you don't have to go home but you can't stay here" announcement before the first dance even started. So I for one was waiting breathlessly for her view on the situation.
BTW, what did she do as Senator? Some fools think it was just a stepping stone to the White House. I know that can't be right, New Yorkers are too smart for that, right?




LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 7:44:25 PM)

I'm sorry, some of you might have been at that party and such memories need not be stirred. I apologize. That was a bit sadistic.





NoirMetal -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 7:54:09 PM)

I think it's something stronger than that. Some sort of zombie stabilizing serum, perhaps.

It was commented during her time in the white house that all of that cocaine didn't make her any nicer.

Though she evidently had pretty good aim with ashtrays when Billy pissed her off. He hit his eye on the door-righto.




Greta75 -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 7:57:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
move along? you are the one who wants to smear hillary as a culprit in this, and she isnt the one being accused of sexual harassment or rape,

I am holding Hillary up to her claim that she champions women. NOT because she is a woman, but HER CLAIM and Michelle Obama Claim, that, Hillary champions women! So I gotta call her out when she kept silence and took like forever to denounce something so obviously a female abuser.

But you were trying to say that Trump is as bad as Weinstein.

All I can say, he paid none of those allegations off. And no women have came forward and claim Trump grab their pussy. As you like to say that his locker room brag is proof of his guilt that he grabs women pussy without their permission.


quote:

Trump is just defending his honour? no he has threatened to sue them, and the NY times,by making more disparaging comments.

Usually suing somebody means defending your honour, challenging the accuser whether what they are saying is true. Paying off someone means you are guilty and silencing the accuser. See the difference? So he should definitely sue the women who defamed him.

Harvey Weinstein IF he was innocent would have sued too. I think he knows he would lose the law suit, despite being richer due to overwhelming evidence, so he paid them to silence them instead.

Trump has enough haters to fund these women to take him on if any of these ladies really want to pursue Trump for sexual harassment. Hell, some billionaires might chip in take him down.

Why do you think it has not happen yet?

Sex scandal, a genuine one, would impeach him like Clinton immediately. IF they got something legitimate. More than enough enemies to fund the girls, back the girls and take him down.






LTE -> RE: I knew Hillary is FOS about her "pro-woman" stances (10/11/2017 7:59:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Greta75


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
move along? you are the one who wants to smear hillary as a culprit in this, and she isnt the one being accused of sexual harassment or rape,

I am holding Hillary up to her claim that she champions women. NOT because she is a woman, but HER CLAIM and Michelle Obama Claim, that, Hillary champions women! So I gotta call her out when she kept silence and took like forever to denounce something so obviously a female abuser.

But you were trying to say that Trump is as bad as Weinstein.

All I can say, he paid none of those allegations off. And no women have came forward and claim Trump grab their pussy. As you like to say that his locker room brag is proof of his guilt that he grabs women pussy without their permission.


quote:

Trump is just defending his honour? no he has threatened to sue them, and the NY times,by making more disparaging comments.

Usually suing somebody means defending your honour, challenging the accuser whether what they are saying is true. Paying off someone means you are guilty and silencing the accuser. See the difference?




Impressive.




Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.171875