Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating

     

Left Nav S-B Home Register FAQ Members List S-B on Facebook Arcade WEAX Tides Buoys Calendar Today's Posts Right Nav

Left Container Right Container
 

Go Back   Striper Talk Striped Bass Fishing, Surfcasting, Boating » Striper Chat - Discuss stuff other than fishing ~ The Scuppers and Political talk » Political Threads

Political Threads This section is for Political Threads - Enter at your own risk. If you say you don't want to see what someone posts - don't read it :hihi:

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 07-26-2016, 07:39 AM   #1
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Hillary Clinton has conceded that she "did misspeak" about landing in Bosnia under sniper fire, blaming tiredness for a dramatic description that was shown to have been significantly exaggerated.

After initially dismissing the controversy over her comments as a "minor blip", she told a Pittsburgh radio station: "You know I have written about this and described it in many different settings and I did misspeak the other day. This has been a very long campaign. Occasionally, I am a human being like everybody else."

I thought this happened 2 years ago. It was 1996.
"Hillary Clinton has conceded that she "did misspeak" about landing in Bosnia under sniper fire, blaming tiredness "

Yes that's what she said. And no rational person believes that. First, saying "I misspoke" is nowhere near the same as saying "I lied". What she did, is claim that she made an honest mistake. The problem, no normally functioning human being, ever, has honestly mistaken a smiling child handing you a flower, with a sniper shooting at your head. Second, as I asked before (and which you dodged, naturally), if being tired renders her unable to differentiate between a smiling child and an enemy sniper, how can you say she's fit to be POTUS?

Paul, give it up. You won't admit she lied, and no one believes that she made an honest mistake. No one confuses such things.

"significantly exaggerated."

As opposed to lied. Got it.

How do you guys say these things with a straight face, exactly?
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 08:02 AM   #2
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
Paul, give it up. You won't admit she lied, and no one believes that she made an honest mistake.Is it a wonder people ignore you and let you ask the same stupid question time after time after time. Go back and look at post 228. I said "she acknowledged her lie".
How do you guys say these things with a straight face, exactly?
And also just like I posted at 730 this morning about the "serial liar" statement. Your reading comprehension stinks - your constantly mis-stating what people say. Take your time and read things slowly.

Got any lies she said from 1995? - Petty
PaulS is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 08:16 AM   #3
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
And also just like I posted at 730 this morning about the "serial liar" statement. Your reading comprehension stinks - your constantly mis-stating what people say. Take your time and read things slowly.

Got any lies she said from 1995? - Petty
"who knows if they are lies or what. If you want to call them lies, you can".

That's an exact quote of yours. Am I mis-stating it? Am I comprehending it incorrectly? I don't think so.
Jim in CT is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:07 AM   #4
PaulS
Registered User
iTrader: (0)
 
PaulS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 10,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim in CT View Post
"who knows if they are lies or what. If you want to call them lies, you can".

That's an exact quote of yours. Am I mis-stating it? Am I comprehending it incorrectly? I don't think so.
Yes, you are absolutely misstating it bc your are only quoting 1/2 of a statement (isn't that the type of sleazy stuff Breitbart does?) in an attempt to change the meaning and by doing that your implying I never said she hasn't lied. I started the statement by saying that "I don't think she is a serial liar". Anyone with any intellecticual honesty (or with any basic reading comprehension) would understand that didn't imply that I didn't think she never lied.

How petty is it of you to continue to discuss things that she said in 1995?
PaulS is offline  
Old 07-26-2016, 10:53 AM   #5
Jim in CT
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 20,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulS View Post
Yes, you are absolutely misstating it bc your are only quoting 1/2 of a statement (isn't that the type of sleazy stuff Breitbart does?) in an attempt to change the meaning and by doing that your implying I never said she hasn't lied. I started the statement by saying that "I don't think she is a serial liar". Anyone with any intellecticual honesty (or with any basic reading comprehension) would understand that didn't imply that I didn't think she never lied.

How petty is it of you to continue to discuss things that she said in 1995?
Half the statement? I wish I knew how to take a screen shot and post it, because it was your whole statement.

In your post which I put here, you denied she lied. You called it mis-remembering or something, and said it wasn't deliberate on her part, but rather due to being tired. Poor little lamb, didn't get her 10 hours of sleep.

"I never said she hasn't lied"

OK, let's stop playing semantic bullsh*t games, and end this right now. Did she lie about the sniper thing, yes or no?

"discuss things that she said in 1995"

OK, there's a statute of limitations? Well, if you want more current...she lied when she said they were broke when they left the White House. She lied when she said she turned over all of her work emails (there were 3,000 the FBI had to recover on their own), and she lied when she said she didn't send any emails that were flagged as classified (there were 3).

Current enough?

Brian Williams told a very similar lie, and it was determined that the lie precluded him from reading the news off a teleprompter, which a monkey can do. So why doesn't that same lie, preclude her from being POTUS? Surely being POTUS requires a higher degree of trust than being a TV news reporter? I have asked dozens of liberals that question, and the only response I get back is a blank stare.

You denied that her tale was a lie. Then you excused it by buying her story that she was tired. Even if that's true (which it's not), here's another question that no liberal can answer...if being tired means she can't distinguish between a smiling toddler and an enemy sniper shooting at her, doesn't THAT mean she's not fit to be commander-in-chief? What if she has a sleepless night, and a girl scout tries to give her a flower, and she yells at her secret service agent "SHE'S AN ENEMY SNIPER TRYING TO KILL ME! SHOOT HER!"

If lack of sleep makes her that deranged, you want her to have the nuclear launch codes? Doesn't the job of POTUS carry the risk that she might have to make critical decisions while tired?

You have fun trying to answer that. Again, I've asked that to dozens of liberals. The most cogent response I've gotten, is "a-der-der."
Jim in CT is offline  
 

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:20 AM.


Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Please use all necessary and proper safety precautions. STAY SAFE Striper Talk Forums
Copyright 1998-20012 Striped-Bass.com