DUDE!

DUDE!

uhhhhh ... DUDE!

Oh man, this reminds me the people I use to sell quantities to. You'd go to these people's houses and half the time they were crank fiends and despite having all that extra go juice, their houses would look like the Paleozoic traveled through time and took a shit in their living room. They always had Pit Bulls, too.

I was so glad when I moved on to dealing coke and didn't have to deal with the kinda people who bought drugs anymore.

So, take a short cherry picked list of American inventions created largely with public funding, then claim only American capitalism could have produced them? Uhhhhh......

The inventors of the internet were NOT able to profit directly from their own ideas, they were military and publicly funded schools working in conjunction to create a publicly owned private data sharing network. Later, when this publicly funded network was opened to the public, private companies used it for private profit, and (often) slowed progress and stymied advancements in the process.
It's simply wrong to claim government funded advancements are due to capitalism simply because the taxes came from a capitalist country. Wow.

What about 5G...China is ahead of any capitalist country on that, and many other computing advancements. Those technicians don't see a scintilla of profit from their inventions, ideas, and often businesses (granted, some are allowed to make billions, but only a certain few that are government affiliated oligarchs, and it can be stripped from them the instant they don't tow the party line).

uhhhhh

But you have zero proof. You're stating that you have enough proof, but yet you really don't have any proof. You have circumstantial evidence.

I have zero doubts that DWS once in that position helped because she and Clinton are friends and political allies. But that's not quid pro quo. If Clinton hires her to help in her campaign, it isn't quid pro quo if Clinton hired her because of DWS's skills in the area. You have zero proof that's why DWS was hired. You have zero proof DWS did "whatever Clinton asked her to do". You have zero proof Clinton asked her to do anything that broke the rules in the first place. None.

You are inferring every single accusation you made against Clinton. There's absolutely no evidence of any of them at all.

Clinton has zero insights about what the public thinks? You're kidding, right? The woman who was the front runner for the Democratic nomination, who has been in the public spotlight at the national stage for almost 25 years doesn't have any insight about what the public thinks?

Come on, man.

Also, DWS's job wasn't solely to ensure the nominating process was fair. She had a ton of responsibilities, and many of them she did well. That was my point. All you're seeing is the part where she screwed up because it hurt your preferred candidate. Her job was also to protect the Democratic party, and help Democrats win elections, too.

Perhaps a few might say DWS wasn't the reason Sanders lost? A few? You mean like.... ohhhhh, I dunno... Bernie Sanders? How about Bernie Sanders' staff members? But what the hell do they know, AMIRITE?

Dude, Sanders got crushed with minorities. You know where that can allow you to win the nomination? The GOP. Unfortunately for Sanders, he was running for the nomination where minorities are a significant part of the voting bloc. Absolutely CRUSHED. Clinton won 76% of the African-American vote. Before the primaries really began, Clinton was polling at 73% among Hispanics. You honestly think that was because of DWS? Let me put that to rest for you. Hillary Clinton did well among Hispanics against Barack Obama. Was that DWS's doing, too?

That's the thing. I have clear cut FACTS about why Sanders lost. I have the words from Bernie Sanders and his campaign staff. You have speculation about whatever small impact DWS's had on primary votes.

Valarie Plame? No, Bush never named her. It ended up being Karl Rove.

How did I shove Hillary Clinton down your throat? Explain that one to me. I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. In VA, I chose to vote in the GOP primary to do whatever I could to stop Trump, which was vote for Marco Rubio, as he was polling second in VA. I didn't do a damn thing to stop Sanders or help Clinton win the nomination.

Why didn't I vote for Sanders? Because of his lack of foreign policy experience, and he wasn't putting forth enough practical policies that I think would work. I like the guy fine. I'd vote for him as a Senator if he was in Virginia. I like having voices like his in Congress. But Commander In Chief is a big part of the job, and I want someone with foreign policy experience. He doesn't have that.

I also value flexibility in a candidate. The world isn't black and white. I like Sanders' values. It would be nice if everyone could go to college if they had the motivation. I very much think the rich are not taxed nearly enough. But I also think ideologies and ideals help to create ideas for solutions, but the solutions need to be practical, and I don't find his practical unfortunately. Sometimes they're not politically practical. Sometimes they just fall apart on the mechanics of them.

Gary Johnson has more experience? Uhhhhh, no. He was governor of New Mexico for 8 years. That compares well to Sarah Palin. Do you think Palin is more experienced than Clinton, too? Johnson has zero foreign policy experience. Hillary Clinton was an active first lady who proposed Health Care Reform, got children's health care reform passed. She was a US Senator for the short time of 8 years, which is way less than Johnson's 8 years as governor of New Mexico (wait, what?!), was on the foreign relations committee during that time. Then she was Secretary of State.

Sanders is the only one who I'd put in the ballpark, but he's had legislative branch experience only, and he doesn't have much foreign policy experience at all. Interestingly enough, you said he was the most experienced candidate, overlooking his complete lack of executive experience, which you favored when it came to Gary Johnson. Huh?

Clinton can't win? You know, I wouldn't even say Trump *can't* win. Once normalized from the convention bounce, she'll be the favorite to win. Sure, she could still lose, but I wouldn't bet against her.

Clinton supporters have blinders on only. Seriously? Dude, EVERY candidate has supporters with blinders on. Every single candidate. Most voters are ignorant, regardless of candidate. Don't give me that holier than thou stuff. You've got blinders on for why Sanders lost.

There are candidates who are threats if elected. There are incompetent candidates. There are competent candidates. There are great candidates. Sorry, but there aren't great candidates every election. I've voted in enough presidential elections to know you should be grateful to have at least one competent candidate who has a shot of winning. Sometimes there aren't any. Sometimes there are a few.

In your mind, I'm a Hillary supporter with blinders on. I'm not beholden to any party. I'm not beholden to any candidate. It's just not in my nature. This is the first presidential candidate from a major party in my lifetime that I felt was truly an existential threat to the US and the world in Trump. I'm a level headed person. Hillary Clinton has an astounding lack of charisma for a politician who won a major party's nomination. I don't find her particularly inspiring. I think it's a legitimate criticism to say she sometimes bends to the political winds too much. She sometimes doesn't handle things like the email thing like she should, as she flees to secrecy from a paranoia from the press and the other party, which is often a mistake, but you have to understand at some level why. She's a part of a major political party, which has a lot of "this is how the sausage is made" in every party out there, and she operates within that system.

If she were a meal, she'd be an unseasoned microwaved chicken breast, with broccoli, with too much salt on it to pander to people some to get them to want to eat it. And you wouldn't want to see how the chicken was killed. But you need to eat. Sure, there's too much salt. Sure, it's not drawing you to the table, but it's nutritious mostly, and you need to eat. It's a meal made of real food.

Let's go along with you thinking Sanders is SOOOOOOOOOOO much better. He was a perfectly prepared steak dinner, but it's lean steak, and lots of organic veggies, perfectly seasoned, and low salt. It's a masterpiece meal that the restaurant no longer offers, and you gotta eat.

Donald Trump is a plate of deep fried oreos. While a surprising number of people find that tasty, it also turns out the cream filling was contaminated with salmonella.

Gary Johnson looks like a better meal than the chicken, but you're told immediately if you order it, you're gonna get contaminated deep fried oreos or the chicken, and you have absolutely no say which it will be.

You can bitch and complain all you want about Clinton. But Sanders is out.

As Bill Maher would say, eat the chicken.

I'm not voting for Clinton solely because I hate Trump. She's a competent candidate. At least we have one to choose from who can actually win.

And I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comparison of Trump to Clinton. One of them has far more governmental experience. One of them isn't unhinged. One of them is clearly not racist or sexist. You would at least agree with that, right? Clinton, for all her warts, is not racist, sexist, bigoted, and actually knows how government works. To equate them is insane to me. I'm sorry.

And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in 2000. I totally get voting for a third party candidate in some situations. This isn't the time.

Edit: You know who else is considering voting for Clinton? Penn Jillette, one of the most vocal Clinton haters out there, and outspoken libertarian. Even he is saying if the election is close enough, he'll have to vote for her.

"“My friend Christopher Hitchens wrote a book called No One Left to Lie To about the Clintons,” Jillette says. “I have written and spoken and joked with friends the meanest, cruelest, most hateful things that could ever been said by me, have been said about the Clintons. I loathe them. I disagree with Hillary Clinton on just about everything there is to disagree with a person about. If it comes down to Trump and Hillary, I will put a Hillary Clinton sticker on my fucking car.”

But he says he hopes the race will turn out well enough that he feels safe casting his vote for Gary Johnson, who is running on the libertarian ticket, and who he believes is the best choice."
http://www.newsweek.com/penn-jillette-terrified-president-trump-431837

Uhhhhh ... *wtf Makes me want to move to the country! [or does it?]

Uhhhhh, Gandhi was a sort of cunt, eh? He certainly treated women like shit for the most part, kinna like what I'd imagine Dickly Skeeverstein here to regard them as, and while his live comedy is tired, we do enjoy the evolution of Brand-

uhhhhh...that guys' dead-

she is considered the most ugliest woman in the world ? Wont upvote it as I did not watch the entire video but.. uhhhhh. . . Seems sensationalized as she clearly is not the ugliest, a couple things are off sure but I actually find her kinda cute. wtf ? This video seems like a sham. Dr.Drew is a sham, his whole god damn show is a joke. If that guy is a registered Doctor then they must of been giving practitioners licenses out with the penny candy at the local corner store back when he was 12.

uhhhhh, weird... this got posted twice... *discard

@ 9:40 "A thing called 'Steam???' which is uhhhhh some sorta gaming site?"

You can tell these investigators really have their shit together.

Uhhhhh...Can you please STOP helping insects evolve to suck human blood? ty

*notdead

uhhhhhhh, nA NA nA NAaaaaa make'em say uhhhhh uhhhhhhh nah nahh nah naaaaaaaaaaa.

Uhhhhh....I missed something Arvana...Why are you in handcuffs???

I like the last comment...

"Ummm uhhhhh.. I'd like to move off David Kucinich."

Obviously what Kucinich said was correct.

This isn't about the Taliban or Al Qaeda. It is about an oil pipeline through Afghanistan.

Here's one for ya-the first user to respond on this post i ripped a new asshole au privae... someone that does not understand simple requests and wishes rather to masturbate in public while continuing to offend himself with each keystroke...Not impressed.

The next in line reminds me smugly and self-satisfactorily so, of shit I already know, appreciate, and accept as a penance.Thank you.
Nothing gold about it nibby-Your opinion is duly noted and accepted as a reaction of process and stimulus-Thanks for interjecting.
Why?? Was I given a golden what? You have inside info on how someone's brain works beside yer own? Cool. Fill me the fuck in. Be happy with "just"...hate that fucking word-a filler word such as like and nice and uhhhhh...... Ok. Done. I am. Happy as fuck. Zombie? Hmmmm. Gimme a thigh motherfucker.

Now these are simply words strung together and a man expressing himself, no malice intended...simply enlightenment.

Next?

(the post, for the cheap seats, is a public question for the admins, rendered in a fashion and tone not changing any time soon.)