|
Post by Merge on Aug 3, 2016 22:05:41 GMT
Your understanding is incorrect. 4 people have corroborated the statement that Hillary blamed the video to them, including one who wrote her down her actions and words verbatim, you know, so there was no chance of memories becoming clouded "in the fog of war" as Hillary claims has happened. 3 of the 4 families claim she said it. But we're supposed to believe it's all 4 people lying and not the confirmed liar who's the one doing the lying. True, disagreeing with them is not disparaging them, but calling them liars most certainly is. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. Politifact says "some family members don't remember any discussion of a video." So apparently my understanding is correct. "She's wrong. She's absolutely wrong." Those were the words Clinton used, tempered by "I can't imagine the grief she's feeling." Clinton didn't use the word "lie" or "liar," she just refuted the claim, while continuing to show compassion for the claimant. I'm still not sure how this is insulting. There does seem to be a discrepancy or misunderstanding in different accounts. In an interview later, a reporter asked her, "Someone is lying here; who is it?" And Clinton's reply was that it was not her. The reporter used the word lie and Clinton denied lying - again, not saying anyone else did or agreeing with the reporter. Not insulting Ms. Smith, not disparaging her family and beliefs, just answering the question and telling her version of events. I can understand why Ms. Smith was hurt and upset by this, but it still doesn't rise to the level of an intentional insult. As I mentioned above, we'll never know for sure what was said or happened. It doesn't make sense to me, personally, that the US would seek out and kill a foreign imprison a propaganda maker from our own country, or promise to do so, since making inflammatory videos is not illegal, but I admit may not have a full understanding of the situation.
|
|
back to *pea*ality
Pearl Clutcher
Not my circus, not my monkeys ~refugee pea #59
Posts: 3,149
Jun 25, 2014 19:51:11 GMT
|
Post by back to *pea*ality on Aug 3, 2016 22:21:41 GMT
Your understanding is incorrect. 4 people have corroborated the statement that Hillary blamed the video to them, including one who wrote her down her actions and words verbatim, you know, so there was no chance of memories becoming clouded "in the fog of war" as Hillary claims has happened. 3 of the 4 families claim she said it. But we're supposed to believe it's all 4 people lying and not the confirmed liar who's the one doing the lying. True, disagreeing with them is not disparaging them, but calling them liars most certainly is. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. And there are reports refuting your comments/opinion. Just because it's not what you want to hear... You do realize that Mrs. Smith and Mr. Woods are also gold star families. Mr. Woods kept a diary and made notes of the day's events when his son's coffin was brought to Andrews. There is video out there of him pulling the diary out of his pocket and reading Hillary's lies. Clinton recently in her arrogance stated it was time to move on from this. In response, Mrs. Woods (widow of Tyrone) said "Nobody in government can tell me how I feel, what I should feel about it," Woods said. "She has no right -- nor does anyone in government have the right -- to tell me it's time to move on. They're not in my shoes." Your remarks show no empathy.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 22:34:58 GMT
And there are reports refuting your comments/opinion. Just because it's not what you want to hear... You do realize that Mrs. Smith and Mr. Woods are also gold star families. Mr. Woods kept a diary and made notes of the day's events when his son's coffin was brought to Andrews. There is video out there of him pulling the diary out of his pocket and reading Hillary's lies. Clinton recently in her arrogance stated it was time to move on from this. In response, Mrs. Woods (widow of Tyrone) said "Nobody in government can tell me how I feel, what I should feel about it," Woods said. "She has no right -- nor does anyone in government have the right -- to tell me it's time to move on. They're not in my shoes." Your remarks show no empathy. Did Hillary specifically tell the 4 families that it was time to move on or did her comment that it was time to move on from Benghazi was a general comment because after 7-8 Congressional hearings it is time to move on from Benghazi in general. There is a difference.
|
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,530
Jun 26, 2014 21:55:15 GMT
|
Post by jayfab on Aug 3, 2016 22:47:53 GMT
Your understanding is incorrect. 4 people have corroborated the statement that Hillary blamed the video to them, including one who wrote her down her actions and words verbatim, you know, so there was no chance of memories becoming clouded "in the fog of war" as Hillary claims has happened. 3 of the 4 families claim she said it. But we're supposed to believe it's all 4 people lying and not the confirmed liar who's the one doing the lying. True, disagreeing with them is not disparaging them, but calling them liars most certainly is. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. And there are reports refuting your comments/opinion. Just because it's not what you want to hear... Yup. To keep harping about the video just shows that the repubs don't care about the families. Chris Stevens family has repeatedly asked to stop politicizing this. But it keeps their base angered so to heck with the feelings of Ambassadors family. Here's a great article with Dr. Anne Stevens, Chris's sister. After years of congressional investigations, do you feel that your brother’s death has been politicized in Washington?
Here's just one of the questions in the article: After years of congressional investigations, do you feel that your brother’s death has been politicized in Washington? "Yes! Definitely politicized. Every report I read that mentions him specifically has a political bent, an accusatory bent. One point that seems to be brought up again and again is the accusation that the attack was a response to the video. I could understand why that conclusion would be made, because it was right after the attack on the U.S. Embassy in Egypt. But, frankly, it doesn’t matter that that was the thinking, that night, about why the attack occurred. It’s irrelevant to bring that up again and again. It is done purely for political reasons. It would be much more useful for Congress to focus on providing resources for security for all State Department facilities around the world—for increasing personnel, language capabilities, for increasing staff to build relationships, particularly in North Africa and the Middle East. I would love to hear they are drastically increasing the budget." The whole article is worth reading.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 3, 2016 23:06:19 GMT
Hillary Shill #2,626,918 checking in! Have I missed anything or is it a pretty good assumption that we have another four pages of BENGHAZI!!! EMAILS!!! FRAUD!!! LIES!!!?
#ImWithHer and not out of fear or hate.
|
|
|
Post by gmcwife1 on Aug 3, 2016 23:59:31 GMT
To insert a little levity here, I read the title of this thread as "hillbilly shills" and wondered what in the world that could possibly be and since I am maybe a little bit of a redneck, how I could make some money shilling. For the record, I think both candidates are complete and total dirt bags and electing either one of them is just going to cause our already very split and polarized country to become even worse. I am also disappointed to learn that there is no paying shill job for me. I agree I know it's been a while since Hillary said the republicans were the enemy, but that is still what her attitude is. Neither one of them will bring this country together or anything close
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 4, 2016 1:12:26 GMT
And there are reports refuting your comments/opinion. Just because it's not what you want to hear... You do realize that Mrs. Smith and Mr. Woods are also gold star families. Mr. Woods kept a diary and made notes of the day's events when his son's coffin was brought to Andrews. There is video out there of him pulling the diary out of his pocket and reading Hillary's lies. Clinton recently in her arrogance stated it was time to move on from this. In response, Mrs. Woods (widow of Tyrone) said "Nobody in government can tell me how I feel, what I should feel about it," Woods said. "She has no right -- nor does anyone in government have the right -- to tell me it's time to move on. They're not in my shoes." Your remarks show no empathy. My remarks were NOT in any way directed towards the family
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Aug 4, 2016 1:29:55 GMT
At least the Hillary shills are being paid. The Trump shills were promised $100 for each post, but then he refused to pay and only settled for $40 or a threat to take them to court.
|
|
scorpeao
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,521
Location: NorCal USA
Jun 25, 2014 21:04:54 GMT
|
Post by scorpeao on Aug 4, 2016 1:43:10 GMT
Your understanding is incorrect. 4 people have corroborated the statement that Hillary blamed the video to them, including one who wrote her down her actions and words verbatim, you know, so there was no chance of memories becoming clouded "in the fog of war" as Hillary claims has happened. 3 of the 4 families claim she said it. But we're supposed to believe it's all 4 people lying and not the confirmed liar who's the one doing the lying. True, disagreeing with them is not disparaging them, but calling them liars most certainly is. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. He didn't write it down verbatim. He went home and wrote in a diary. In his mind it may be verbatim, but in a highly emotional atmosphere and state I highly doubt he remembered word for word what she said. There's no proof, NONE, that she said anything about the protestors and video. Furthermore, if you had done your homework you'd know that when the meeting with the families took place they didn't know what spurred the attacks; they weren't sure if it was terrorism or the protest. That information didn't come out until a day, maybe two, later. Finally, are you calling the families that said she didn't bring up the video liars? Why do you believe some families and not the others?
|
|
jayfab
Drama Llama
procastinating
Posts: 5,530
Jun 26, 2014 21:55:15 GMT
|
Post by jayfab on Aug 4, 2016 2:02:31 GMT
At least the Hillary shills are being paid. The Trump shills were promised $100 for each post, but then he refused to pay and only settled for $40 or a threat to take them to court. SaveSave
|
|
tincin
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,368
Jul 25, 2014 4:55:32 GMT
|
Post by tincin on Aug 4, 2016 2:59:03 GMT
Hillary Shill #2,626,918 checking in! Have I missed anything or is it a pretty good assumption that we have another four pages of BENGHAZI!!! EMAILS!!! FRAUD!!! LIES!!!? #ImWithHer and not out of fear or hate. Did you forget the first rule of being a Hillary Shill? We don't talk about Hillary Shills. SMH Save
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,376
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Aug 4, 2016 3:32:35 GMT
No, BeckyTech, we are not saying he's crazy because nothing else has worked. We are saying it because it is true. Donald J Trump is a deranged lunatic with sociopathic tendencies who is a danger to the world
|
|
pudgygroundhog
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,643
Location: The Grand Canyon
Jun 25, 2014 20:18:39 GMT
|
Post by pudgygroundhog on Aug 4, 2016 5:33:35 GMT
I don't know how many times I've been accused of voting with my vagina (I really need to rethink the placement of my "I Voted" sticker) and now shilling? Can I say that my vagina is shilling? I feel like that is something that needs to be added to the Urban Dictionary.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2016 6:52:35 GMT
Your understanding is incorrect. 4 people have corroborated the statement that Hillary blamed the video to them, including one who wrote her down her actions and words verbatim, you know, so there was no chance of memories becoming clouded "in the fog of war" as Hillary claims has happened. 3 of the 4 families claim she said it. But we're supposed to believe it's all 4 people lying and not the confirmed liar who's the one doing the lying. True, disagreeing with them is not disparaging them, but calling them liars most certainly is. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. Politifact says "some family members don't remember any discussion of a video." So apparently my understanding is correct. "She's wrong. She's absolutely wrong." Those were the words Clinton used, tempered by "I can't imagine the grief she's feeling." Clinton didn't use the word "lie" or "liar," she just refuted the claim, while continuing to show compassion for the claimant. I'm still not sure how this is insulting. There does seem to be a discrepancy or misunderstanding in different accounts. In an interview later, a reporter asked her, "Someone is lying here; who is it?" And Clinton's reply was that it was not her. The reporter used the word lie and Clinton denied lying - again, not saying anyone else did or agreeing with the reporter. Not insulting Ms. Smith, not disparaging her family and beliefs, just answering the question and telling her version of events. I can understand why Ms. Smith was hurt and upset by this, but it still doesn't rise to the level of an intentional insult. As I mentioned above, we'll never know for sure what was said or happened. It doesn't make sense to me, personally, that the US would seek out and kill a foreign imprison a propaganda maker from our own country, or promise to do so, since making inflammatory videos is not illegal, but I admit may not have a full understanding of the situation. Quotes from 3 of the 4 families... From your article: We know that the alleged protests were "because of the video", so to say she mentioned the protests but not the video is splitting hairs and very misleading of Politifact. As you can see from Doherty’s sister's quote that I provided, that despite Politifact's splitting of hairs in an attempt to show that his sister was validating Hillary, she in fact does not validate her at all and also finds Hillary to be a liar. As for your second point, Hillary doesn't have to outright say the word liar to convey that they are the ones lying, not her. To claim that she didn't say the word liar is proof that she didn't convey the message, is completely disingenuous. The statement you quoted is the tap dance she did AFTER the original statement. You know, to soften the original blow of disparaging three grieving families. The original statement she made about 3 grieving families: She originally didn't dance around it and say that no one was lying and it must just be a misunderstanding. No, channeling Trump... or something, she outright said that she wasn't the one doing the lying. The logical conclusion to that is that someone is lying, but it's not her, because she said so. But someone is. That only leaves the family members. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2016 7:21:18 GMT
Adding my voice to those saying that the title of this thread is just downright rude; there is no need to do that. Judging from the silence on previous insults, it looks as if it's okay to call Trump supporters names and insult them, just as long as you don't put it in the title.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 4, 2016 12:22:53 GMT
Politifact says "some family members don't remember any discussion of a video." So apparently my understanding is correct. "She's wrong. She's absolutely wrong." Those were the words Clinton used, tempered by "I can't imagine the grief she's feeling." Clinton didn't use the word "lie" or "liar," she just refuted the claim, while continuing to show compassion for the claimant. I'm still not sure how this is insulting. There does seem to be a discrepancy or misunderstanding in different accounts. In an interview later, a reporter asked her, "Someone is lying here; who is it?" And Clinton's reply was that it was not her. The reporter used the word lie and Clinton denied lying - again, not saying anyone else did or agreeing with the reporter. Not insulting Ms. Smith, not disparaging her family and beliefs, just answering the question and telling her version of events. I can understand why Ms. Smith was hurt and upset by this, but it still doesn't rise to the level of an intentional insult. As I mentioned above, we'll never know for sure what was said or happened. It doesn't make sense to me, personally, that the US would seek out and kill a foreign imprison a propaganda maker from our own country, or promise to do so, since making inflammatory videos is not illegal, but I admit may not have a full understanding of the situation. Quotes from 3 of the 4 families... From your article: We know that the alleged protests were "because of the video", so to say she mentioned the protests but not the video is splitting hairs and very misleading of Politifact. As you can see from Doherty’s sister's quote that I provided, that despite Politifact's splitting of hairs in an attempt to show that his sister was validating Hillary, she in fact does not validate her at all and also finds Hillary to be a liar. As for your second point, Hillary doesn't have to outright say the word liar to convey that they are the ones lying, not her. To claim that she didn't say the word liar is proof that she didn't convey the message, is completely disingenuous. The statement you quoted is the tap dance she did AFTER the original statement. You know, to soften the original blow of disparaging three grieving families. The original statement she made about 3 grieving families: She originally didn't dance around it and say that no one was lying and it must just be a misunderstanding. No, channeling Trump... or something, she outright said that she wasn't the one doing the lying. The logical conclusion to that is that someone is lying, but it's not her, because she said so. But someone is. That only leaves the family members. So yes, Hillary did in fact also disparage not just one, but three grieving families. We'll have to agree to disagree. I just don't read those statements the way you do.
|
|
scrapnnana
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,175
Jun 29, 2014 18:58:47 GMT
|
Post by scrapnnana on Aug 4, 2016 12:51:54 GMT
As soon as I read this thread title, I knew it would be a hornet's nest.
While I agree that the title was deliberately provocative and rather rude, rudeness seems to be a common tactic in things political. Rudeness doesn't exactly invite people to discuss things calmly.
However, other than the thread title, I agree with everything BeckyTech said regarding why Hillary would be a disaster. Unfortunately, I think Trump would also be a terrible president. I am not happy with either choice. I don't like the Libertarian candidate any better.
I wish we could dump all candidates and start over, but that would take time we don't have, and the reality is that we would probably not get any better candidates.
Politics have gotten so ugly, and controlled so tightly by the media, lawyers, and other special interests, that I don't think we have a chance of getting a decent candidate, even if we did start over.
I honestly have no idea who I can vote for in good conscience.
I think we are in for a rough ride no matter who gets elected.
|
|
|
Post by anxiousmom on Aug 4, 2016 13:01:46 GMT
Adding my voice to those saying that the title of this thread is just downright rude; there is no need to do that. Judging from the silence on previous insults, it looks as if it's okay to call Trump supporters names and insult them, just as long as you don't put it in the title. Not a fan of Mr. Trump. But even I agree that there is more than a whiff of a double standard when calling one candidate names and then crying foul when the same happens to a person's preferred candidate. (for the record, I am not calling out anyone on this. I know that I am guilty of similar failings-I routinely call our governor Governor Voldemort because I hate him so very much. I am working on removing the log from my own eye...)
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2016 14:24:29 GMT
Hillary Shill #2,626,918 checking in! Have I missed anything or is it a pretty good assumption that we have another four pages of BENGHAZI!!! EMAILS!!! FRAUD!!! LIES!!!? #ImWithHer and not out of fear or hate. Did you forget the first rule of being a Hillary Shill? We don't talk about Hillary Shills. SMH SaveI got to the meeting late and missed that part.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Aug 4, 2016 15:34:37 GMT
Adding my voice to those saying that the title of this thread is just downright rude; there is no need to do that. Judging from the silence on previous insults, it looks as if it's okay to call Trump supporters names and insult them, just as long as you don't put it in the title. Not everyone does this, but you keep Lumping EVERYONE into a single group. You are not able to differentiate.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Aug 4, 2016 16:15:46 GMT
Elaine, this was my conversation with Merge yesterday, and remember, she was the one that brought her agreement with her husband to the forum:
If that exchange rises to the level of anger, shame, and frothing, maybe you need a little perspective.
I guess that if I were you: 1) I wouldn't repost my rudeness in another thread; and 2) I would be squirming with shame at all the posters - who you didn't quote - who took the time to tell me how inappropriate I was. So, yeah, if I crossed that personal line that you did, and had multiple people call me on it, it would lead to the level of anger and shame I read in your OP. But, your reaction is identical to what Trump would do: 1) refuse to apologize; 2) make weak excuses for why your behavior was okay in your mind (not in anyone else's but Gia); and 3) double-down by reposting your faux pas. I would suggest you go back and look at the user ids 2peasrefugees.boards.net/thread/46705/politics-hillary-clinton-stop-lying?page=3 It was not me who got in a dustup with you and Merge over this simple question.
Plenty of times Peas have said on here "well, I made an agreement with my husband on thus and such, but now I'm rethinking it" and the first and most natural question is always "have you talked with your husband about it?"
Merge's agreement with her husband struck me as creative problem solving and funny to boot and I commented as such at the time, as did several other Peas. It stuck in my mind. So when she said she was thinking of changing her vote, that was the first thing that popped into my head. It was a simple question by me. Answered by Merge. Done and over with.
This is the Pea board, I have no control over the direction any comment or question that I ask will be taken by others. But you seem to think that I should be publicly shamed over natural curiosity or the direction that others chose to take my question. I have three words for you, Elaine, go pound sand.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Aug 4, 2016 16:23:49 GMT
I changed the thread title.
|
|
carhoch
Pearl Clutcher
Be yourself everybody else is already taken
Posts: 2,992
Location: We’re RV’s so It change all the time .
Jun 28, 2014 21:46:39 GMT
|
Post by carhoch on Aug 4, 2016 17:02:57 GMT
Hillary fans, are you guys getting paid by the thread No we do it for free because we think she's the most qualified and the other guy is very scary.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Aug 4, 2016 17:20:25 GMT
I assume the TL;DR version of the OP is "Waah, there's too many anti-Trump threads for me to be offended about and I can't let them scroll by without complaining." But seriously, bravo for having the stamina to write a manifesto-length post (even if I didn't read it). And FTR, I agree with the poster who suggested a single "Trump sucks" and a single "Hillary sucks" thread would be ideal. I'm just not willing to make a scene over it. No to your first sentence. The point was that every day there have been multiple threads trashing Trump and elevating Hillary, but they were just getting to the point where the collective impression was that people were desperately trying to sell Hillary.
The point of this post was that by all rights, Hillary should be running away with this election; Trump has spent the past year shooting himself in the foot (and continues to do so), he is being outspent, and out organized, but he continues to poll well (although today he is dropping). The point was that even setting aside Hillary's lies (none of which were mentioned in the OP), there are plenty of reasons why so many people don't want an Obama third term, which is how Hillary is positioning herself. Plenty of reasons why people don't want politics as usual. I listed but a few of my reasons, although I have plenty more. Plenty of reasons why people will vote Trump, third party, or stay at home.
|
|
|
Post by flanz on Aug 4, 2016 17:51:06 GMT
your arguments crack me up, BeckyTech.
All of the things you blame our president for happened because of the obstructionist in the GOP who determined their number one priority would be for him to FAIL! I equate this to wanting our country to fail, to working for the failure of our country, and I see it as treasonous! It is miraculous that President Obama was able to create any progress in any area affecting middle class and poor folks in such an obstructionist environment! I applaud him, though I don't agree with every decision he ever made. The hatred and racism that spewed forth into the public sphere upon the election of our first black president makes me positively sick!
It is the obstructionist bigoted haters who led to the gains for top 1%, etc., not President Obama and the Democrats.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Aug 4, 2016 18:07:24 GMT
I guess that if I were you: 1) I wouldn't repost my rudeness in another thread; and 2) I would be squirming with shame at all the posters - who you didn't quote - who took the time to tell me how inappropriate I was. So, yeah, if I crossed that personal line that you did, and had multiple people call me on it, it would lead to the level of anger and shame I read in your OP. But, your reaction is identical to what Trump would do: 1) refuse to apologize; 2) make weak excuses for why your behavior was okay in your mind (not in anyone else's but Gia); and 3) double-down by reposting your faux pas. I would suggest you go back and look at the user ids 2peasrefugees.boards.net/thread/46705/politics-hillary-clinton-stop-lying?page=3 It was not me who got in a dustup with you and Merge over this simple question.
Plenty of times Peas have said on here "well, I made an agreement with my husband on thus and such, but now I'm rethinking it" and the first and most natural question is always "have you talked with your husband about it?"
Merge's agreement with her husband struck me as creative problem solving and funny to boot and I commented as such at the time, as did several other Peas. It stuck in my mind. So when she said she was thinking of changing her vote, that was the first thing that popped into my head. It was a simple question by me. Answered by Merge. Done and over with.
This is the Pea board, I have no control over the direction any comment or question that I ask will be taken by others. But you seem to think that I should be publicly shamed over natural curiosity or the direction that others chose to take my question. I have three words for you, Elaine, go pound sand.
Becky, it did feel more like a jab than an innocent question, but it doesn't matter. We're good. I do appreciate Elaine sticking up for me - but I think your motive and Gia's were very different.
|
|
|
Post by BeckyTech on Aug 4, 2016 18:29:16 GMT
Becky, it did feel more like a jab than an innocent question, but it doesn't matter. We're good. I do appreciate Elaine sticking up for me - but I think your motive and Gia's were very different. Thanks, Merge. Maybe my question did have a little bit of snark, but none rising to the level of public shaming. I certainly didn't feel that any comment after your response was warranted and did not make any. That Gia did was disappointing, but I should not be confused with her.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2016 19:01:41 GMT
Judging from the silence on previous insults, it looks as if it's okay to call Trump supporters names and insult them, just as long as you don't put it in the title. Not a fan of Mr. Trump. But even I agree that there is more than a whiff of a double standard when calling one candidate names and then crying foul when the same happens to a person's preferred candidate. (for the record, I am not calling out anyone on this. I know that I am guilty of similar failings-I routinely call our governor Governor Voldemort because I hate him so very much. I am working on removing the log from my own eye...) I wasn't so much talking about the candidates themselves as much as the supporters of, but the sentiment's the same.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 1, 2024 21:30:50 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 4, 2016 19:05:21 GMT
Judging from the silence on previous insults, it looks as if it's okay to call Trump supporters names and insult them, just as long as you don't put it in the title. Not everyone does this, but you keep Lumping EVERYONE into a single group. You are not able to differentiate. I'm just wondering if you possibly responded to the wrong post? Nothing in my statement said one way or the other whether it referred to a group or a single person, so there was no lumping of anyone together.
|
|
cycworker
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,376
Jun 26, 2014 0:42:38 GMT
|
Post by cycworker on Aug 4, 2016 19:53:11 GMT
|
|