Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

DALLAS MORNING NEWS Endorses Hillary Clinton

+3
RealLindaL
Telstar
Floridatexan
7 posters

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Go down  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Floridatexan

Floridatexan


http://beta.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2016/09/07/recommend-hillary-clinton-us-president

There is only one serious candidate on the presidential ballot in November. We recommend Hillary Clinton.

We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections. The party's over-reliance on government and regulation to remedy the country's ills is at odds with our belief in private-sector ingenuity and innovation. Our values are more about individual liberty, free markets and a strong national defense.

We've been critical of Clinton's handling of certain issues in the past. But unlike Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton has experience in actual governance, a record of service and a willingness to delve into real policy.

Resume vs. resume, judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest.
In Clinton's eight years in the U.S. Senate, she displayed reach and influence in foreign affairs. Though conservatives like to paint her as nakedly partisan, on Capitol Hill she gained respect from Republicans for working across the aisle: Two-thirds of her bills had GOP co-sponsors and included common ground with some of Congress' most conservative lawmakers.

As President Barack Obama's first secretary of state, she helped make tough calls on the Middle East and the complex struggle against radical Islamic terrorism. It's no accident that hundreds of Republican foreign policy hands back Clinton. She also has the support of dozens of top advisers from previous Republican administrations, including Henry Paulson, John Negroponte, Richard Armitage and Brent Scowcroft. Also on this list is Jim Glassman, the founding executive director of the George W. Bush Institute in Dallas.

Clinton has remained dogged by questions about her honesty, her willingness to shade the truth. Her use of a private email server while secretary of state is a clear example of poor judgment. She should take additional steps to divorce allegations of influence peddling from the Clinton Foundation. And she must be more forthright with the public by holding news conferences, as opposed to relying on a shield of carefully scripted appearances and speeches.

Those are real shortcomings. But they pale in comparison to the litany of evils some opponents accuse her of. Treason? Murder? Her being cleared of crimes by investigation after investigation has no effect on these political hyenas; they refuse to see anything but conspiracies and cover-ups.

We reject the politics of personal destruction. Clinton has made mistakes and displayed bad judgment, but her errors are plainly in a different universe than her opponent's.

Trump's values are hostile to conservatism. He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.

After nearly four decades in the public spotlight, 25 of them on the national stage, Clinton is a known quantity. For all her warts, she is the candidate more likely to keep our nation safe, to protect American ideals and to work across the aisle to uphold the vital domestic institutions that rely on a competent, experienced president.

Hillary Clinton has spent years in the trenches doing the hard work needed to prepare herself to lead our nation. In this race, at this time, she deserves your vote.

************

Telstar

Telstar

Floridatexan wrote:
http://beta.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/2016/09/07/recommend-hillary-clinton-us-president

There is only one serious candidate on the presidential ballot in November. We recommend Hillary Clinton.

We don't come to this decision easily. This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections. The party's over-reliance on government and regulation to remedy the country's ills is at odds with our belief in private-sector ingenuity and innovation. Our values are more about individual liberty, free markets and a strong national defense.

We've been critical of Clinton's handling of certain issues in the past. But unlike Donald Trump, Hillary Clinton has experience in actual governance, a record of service and a willingness to delve into real policy.

Resume vs. resume, judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest.  
In Clinton's eight years in the U.S. Senate, she displayed reach and influence in foreign affairs. Though conservatives like to paint her as nakedly partisan, on Capitol Hill she gained respect from Republicans for working across the aisle: Two-thirds of her bills had GOP co-sponsors and included common ground with some of Congress' most conservative lawmakers.

As President Barack Obama's first secretary of state, she helped make tough calls on the Middle East and the complex struggle against radical Islamic terrorism. It's no accident that hundreds of Republican foreign policy hands back Clinton. She also has the support of dozens of top advisers from previous Republican administrations, including Henry Paulson, John Negroponte, Richard Armitage and Brent Scowcroft. Also on this list is Jim Glassman, the founding executive director of the George W. Bush Institute in Dallas.

Clinton has remained dogged by questions about her honesty, her willingness to shade the truth. Her use of a private email server while secretary of state is a clear example of poor judgment. She should take additional steps to divorce allegations of influence peddling from the Clinton Foundation. And she must be more forthright with the public by holding news conferences, as opposed to relying on a shield of carefully scripted appearances and speeches.

Those are real shortcomings. But they pale in comparison to the litany of evils some opponents accuse her of. Treason? Murder? Her being cleared of crimes by investigation after investigation has no effect on these political hyenas; they refuse to see anything but conspiracies and cover-ups.

We reject the politics of personal destruction. Clinton has made mistakes and displayed bad judgment, but her errors are plainly in a different universe than her opponent's.

Trump's values are hostile to conservatism. He plays on fear — exploiting base instincts of xenophobia, racism and misogyny — to bring out the worst in all of us, rather than the best. His serial shifts on fundamental issues reveal an astounding absence of preparedness. And his improvisational insults and midnight tweets exhibit a dangerous lack of judgment and impulse control.

After nearly four decades in the public spotlight, 25 of them on the national stage, Clinton is a known quantity. For all her warts, she is the candidate more likely to keep our nation safe, to protect American ideals and to work across the aisle to uphold the vital domestic institutions that rely on a competent, experienced president.

Hillary Clinton has spent years in the trenches doing the hard work needed to prepare herself to lead our nation. In this race, at this time, she deserves your vote.

************



I think this was posted on another topic but it's worth reading again. Smile

RealLindaL



I found this piece astounding and extremely encouraging. Just have to hope a lot of Texans (and others) are actually reading and heeding.

Guest


Guest

"judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest"

If that is truly a criteria in a person's decision making process... there's much that's ignored to pick hillary.

Sal

Sal

PkrBum wrote:"judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest"

If that is truly a criteria in a person's decision making process... there's much that's ignored to pick hillary.

Trump can be a lot of things, but ignored is not one of them.

Telstar

Telstar

Sal wrote:
PkrBum wrote:"judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest"

If that is truly a criteria in a person's decision making process... there's much that's ignored to pick hillary.

Trump can be a lot of things, but ignored is not one of them.


Think Ted Cruz has anything to do with Texas treating Trump like a turd blossom?

RealLindaL



Telstar wrote:
Sal wrote:
PkrBum wrote:"judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest"

If that is truly a criteria in a person's decision making process... there's much that's ignored to pick hillary.

Trump can be a lot of things, but ignored is not one of them.


Think Ted Cruz has anything to do with Texas treating Trump like a turd blossom?

Hmm...interesting thought, Tel, but my uneducated guess is no. Answer might be different if Cruz were a beloved figure in the state, but I sense the opposite is true.

VectorMan

VectorMan

This newspaper has not recommended a Democrat for the nation's highest office since before World War II — if you're counting, that's more than 75 years and nearly 20 elections.

Is that supposed to mean something? What? So now after 75 years DMN has a libtard writing for them? Who was it that wrote that dribble anyway?

Please read the comments section. Doesn't look many Texans are happy with DMN. I've only read the DMN while checking out at the grocery store. Most "newspapers" are just liberal rags anyway. I bet they go only digital soon. LOL

And for the record FUCK HILLARY!

Stupid bitch!

Telstar

Telstar

RealLindaL wrote:
Telstar wrote:
Sal wrote:
PkrBum wrote:"judgment vs. judgment, this election is no contest"

If that is truly a criteria in a person's decision making process... there's much that's ignored to pick hillary.

Trump can be a lot of things, but ignored is not one of them.


Think Ted Cruz has anything to do with Texas treating Trump like a turd blossom?

Hmm...interesting thought, Tel, but my uneducated guess is no.  Answer might be different if Cruz were a beloved figure in the state, but I sense the opposite is true.



Cruz did defeat Trump by double digits in the Texas primary. Texans may not have liked their local hero Cruz and his wife being pushed around by outsider Trump's mob at the RNC.

2seaoat



Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

Telstar

Telstar

2seaoat wrote:Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

Trump's tramps laugh at him twice as hard but they love playing with his dough.

RealLindaL



2seaoat wrote:Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

I don't know Vector well enough as a poster to comment on the other groups Sea mentions, but most certainly his dark hatred of women in general is clearly in evidence in any post involving Hillary.  I, however, am not laughing.   This individual's unashamed broad-brush loathing of womankind is more deserving of our pity than our guffaws.

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

RealLindaL wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

I don't know Vector well enough as a poster to comment on the other groups Sea mentions, but most certainly his dark hatred of women in general is clearly in evidence in any post involving Hillary.  I, however, am not laughing.   This individual's unashamed broad-brush loathing of womankind is more deserving of our pity than our guffaws.



Women in general....knowing Vector it is for Hillary. 

Telstar

Telstar

RealLindaL wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

I don't know Vector well enough as a poster to comment on the other groups Sea mentions, but most certainly his dark hatred of women in general is clearly in evidence in any post involving Hillary.  I, however, am not laughing.   This individual's unashamed broad-brush loathing of womankind is more deserving of our pity than our guffaws.


Let's just hope the misogyny is only displayed in forums like this and not real life.

RealLindaL



Telstar wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
2seaoat wrote:Stupid bitch!


Your hate of women, blacks, Mexicans, and Muslims, are an indication of your intelligence......your writings are your record...........and Hillary would laugh out loud at you.......and I suspect a great many women have done the same.

I don't know Vector well enough as a poster to comment on the other groups Sea mentions, but most certainly his dark hatred of women in general is clearly in evidence in any post involving Hillary.  I, however, am not laughing.   This individual's unashamed broad-brush loathing of womankind is more deserving of our pity than our guffaws.


Let's just hope the misogyny is only displayed in forums like this and not real life.

We can always hope, I suppose, but the question is what's in a person's heart, and where do the hateful phrases come from if not from what resides in that heart.

Guest


Guest

"I don't know Vector well enough as a poster to comment on the other groups Sea mentions, but most certainly his dark hatred of women in general is clearly in evidence in any post involving Hillary."

Really? He hates women in general because he hates hillary? Okey dokey... seagoatess.

I think this same illogical leap... as with Obama and the race card... is pure intellectual laziness. Now you can just discount all criticism without any consideration or rational thought at all. How convenient...

and typical.

VectorMan

VectorMan

I have no hatred of women, blacks, Mexicans or muslims. That is unless they're liars, criminals or liberal radicals. Hillary fits in as a liar, a criminal and a liberal radical. Who'd of thought! LOL

It is so sad and typical of liberals to start claiming there is war on women (or whatever group) when ever someone from the right doesn't like one of these sorry ass liberal women. And since I don't like Obama I guess it's a war on men and blacks. It takes a special kind of stupid to think along those lines. But hey, you're liberals. Nuff said.

I'd also tell Hillary to her funny looking face that she is a stupid bitch. I'm sure she is used to it. She is a mean and nasty one.

None so deaf as that will not hear. None so blind as those that will not see. = liberals. And you liberals own that!

2seaoat



Nonsense......your nomenclature like your intelligence is limited by the culture you hold dear. You have never provided any policy analysis, but attack Hillary or President Obama personally, not because of any specific policy, but because they both are intelligent, they both believe in science, and like the brown shirts in Germany, you consistently look for scapegoats to justify your perverse world view. Your posts have been consistently racist and hateful, and your paradigm was here in the 30s in Germany, and this is nothing more than a cultural battle......one where a return to Jim Crow and your white privilege take attention away from the obvious. Keep trying to be normal.........and pumping that fist at the lynching.....you are not fooling anybody.

Guest


Guest

"You have never provided any policy analysis, but attack Hillary or President Obama personally"

When you have to lie to make an argument... you don't have a valid point.

This is where an intelligent person reflects and reevaluates.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

PkrBum wrote:"You have never provided any policy analysis, but attack Hillary or President Obama personally"

When you have to lie to make an argument... you don't have a valid point.

This is where an intelligent person reflects and reevaluates.

Which has to be difficult for you because you lack the capacity for either.

2seaoat



The Pensacola rally for Trump was the Nuremburg rally, but just in America, and mostly dog whistle.

The worship of the military, the need to scapegoat, the desire of people to seek a strong tyrant to overcome cultural invasion by lesser humans......yes we have seen this before......There are probably not two counties in America with more active and retired military......none of this is by accident. History is repeating itself.



RealLindaL



VectorMan wrote:
And for the record FUCK HILLARY!

Stupid bitch!

I have lived for a lot of years and have never known a man who generally respected women to speak like this of ANY female, no matter how much he disliked her or her political policies.   It's gender hate speech of the male dominance variety, pure and simple -- and seaoat is right, Vector: you're not fooling anyone -- even those who pretend to support you in your nastiness.

Telstar

Telstar

2seaoat wrote:The Pensacola rally for Trump was the Nuremburg rally, but just in America, and mostly dog whistle.

The worship of the military, the need to scapegoat, the desire of people to seek a strong tyrant to overcome cultural invasion by lesser humans......yes we have seen this before......There are probably not two counties in America with more active and retired military......none of this is by accident.  History is repeating itself.






That "Triumph of the Will" is a great propaganda film, there is no doubt, and various surveys have named it so. But I doubt that anyone not already a Nazi could be swayed by it. Being a Nazi, to this film, means being a mindless pawn in thrall to the godlike Hitler. Yet it must have had a persuasive effect in Germany at the time; although Hitler clearly spells out that the Nazis will be Germany's only party, and its leader Germany's only leader for 1,000 years to come. At the end, there is a singing of the party anthem, the Horst Wessel Song; under Nazi law, the right-arm salute had to be given during the first and fourth verses. We see a lot of right-arm saluting in "Triumph of the Will," noticing how Hitler curls his fingers back to his palm before withdrawing the salute each time, with a certain satisfaction. What a horrible man. What insanity that so many Germans embraced him. A sobering thought: Most of the people on the screen were dead within a few years.


http://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-triumph-of-the-will-1935

Joanimaroni

Joanimaroni

RealLindaL wrote:
VectorMan wrote:
And for the record FUCK HILLARY!

Stupid bitch!

I have lived for a lot of years and have never known a man who generally respected women to speak like this of ANY female, no matter how much he disliked her or her political policies.   It's gender hate speech of the male dominance variety, pure and simple -- and seaoat is right, Vector: you're not fooling anyone -- even those who pretend to support you in your nastiness.



Oh trust me....it has happened on this forum but certainly not from Vector. What has happened was worse than anything Vector has ever said.

RealLindaL



Joanimaroni wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
VectorMan wrote:
And for the record FUCK HILLARY!

Stupid bitch!

I have lived for a lot of years and have never known a man who generally respected women to speak like this of ANY female, no matter how much he disliked her or her political policies.   It's gender hate speech of the male dominance variety, pure and simple -- and seaoat is right, Vector: you're not fooling anyone -- even those who pretend to support you in your nastiness.

Oh trust me....it has happened on this forum but certainly not from Vector. What has happened was worse than anything Vector has ever said.

Oh I certainly trust you, Joani, that similar things have happened on this forum, and worse...but from men whom you firmly believed to be generally respectful of women?  That's my point.

I don't know, but when someone feels the need -- besides using the above language -- to put down Hillary's "funny looking face," it just reeks of sexism to me, no better than Trump's making fun of certain women's appearance, as though that were a valid topic for political discussion.   Think Carly Fiorina, for instance.  

I think misogyny has a way of rearing its ugly head and being clearly seen, even when the speaker denies it.

That said, I would love to be proven wrong about Vector.

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 1 of 2]

Go to page : 1, 2  Next

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum