Discussion:
Reichstag fire comparison
(too old to reply)
Marcus
2016-10-17 15:36:43 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I have no idea who was responsible for the firebombing of a Republican campaign office in North Carolina. It would seem logical that the person(s) who committed this crime were anti-Trump or anti-Republican.

However, the minute I heard about it I was reminded of the infamous Reichstag fire in Germany in 1933 which Hitler portrayed as the work of Communists. The fire played a pivotal role in the Nazis rise to power in Germany, and it came right before an important parliamentary election. Many historians have concluded that members of the Nazi party set the building on fire for the purpose of deliberately blaming the communists. The immdeiate outcome of the fire was Germany suspending many rights of the people(at the request of Hitler to the then German leadership). And we know what happened afterward.

Here's what Hitler said after the fire,

"These sub-humans do not understand how the people stand at our side. In their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come, of course they hear nothing of the cheering of the masses."

Here's what Trump said after the North Carolina firebombing,

"Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina just firebombed our office in Orange County because we are winning."

Again, it could very well be that anti-Trump folks bombed the office in NC, but the similarity in tone and substance between the Reichstag fire and the North Carolina bombing is quite coincidental, especially right before the election.

Marc
Lloyd
2016-10-18 11:03:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Marcus" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:77e2f788-fe72-459a-8fb5-***@googlegroups.com...
I have no idea who was responsible for the firebombing of a Republican
campaign office in North Carolina. It would seem logical that the person(s)
who committed this crime were anti-Trump or anti-Republican.

However, the minute I heard about it I was reminded of the infamous
Reichstag fire in Germany in 1933 which Hitler portrayed as the work of
Communists. The fire played a pivotal role in the Nazis rise to power in
Germany, and it came right before an important parliamentary election. Many
historians have concluded that members of the Nazi party set the building on
fire for the purpose of deliberately blaming the communists. The immdeiate
outcome of the fire was Germany suspending many rights of the people(at the
request of Hitler to the then German leadership). And we know what happened
afterward.

Here's what Hitler said after the fire,

"These sub-humans do not understand how the people stand at our side. In
their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come, of course they hear
nothing of the cheering of the masses."

Here's what Trump said after the North Carolina firebombing,

"Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina just
firebombed our office in Orange County because we are winning."

Again, it could very well be that anti-Trump folks bombed the office in NC,
but the similarity in tone and substance between the Reichstag fire and the
North Carolina bombing is quite coincidental, especially right before the
election.

Marc


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


Hey lookee everyone!

Marcus is campaigning for Hillary!!!

Didn't you say Rand Paul was going to win the presidency and Hillary
wouldn't even get on the ballot?

How many feet can you fit in that mouth?
Marcus
2016-10-18 20:19:44 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
I have no idea who was responsible for the firebombing of a Republican
campaign office in North Carolina. It would seem logical that the person(s)
who committed this crime were anti-Trump or anti-Republican.
However, the minute I heard about it I was reminded of the infamous
Reichstag fire in Germany in 1933 which Hitler portrayed as the work of
Communists. The fire played a pivotal role in the Nazis rise to power in
Germany, and it came right before an important parliamentary election. Many
historians have concluded that members of the Nazi party set the building on
fire for the purpose of deliberately blaming the communists. The immdeiate
outcome of the fire was Germany suspending many rights of the people(at the
request of Hitler to the then German leadership). And we know what happened
afterward.
Here's what Hitler said after the fire,
"These sub-humans do not understand how the people stand at our side. In
their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come, of course they hear
nothing of the cheering of the masses."
Here's what Trump said after the North Carolina firebombing,
"Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina just
firebombed our office in Orange County because we are winning."
Again, it could very well be that anti-Trump folks bombed the office in NC,
but the similarity in tone and substance between the Reichstag fire and the
North Carolina bombing is quite coincidental, especially right before the
election.
Marc
**************
Hey lookee everyone!
Marcus is campaigning for Hillary!!!
Didn't you say Rand Paul was going to win the presidency and Hillary
wouldn't even get on the ballot?
How many feet can you fit in that mouth?
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.

Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.

However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president. And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm wrong.

Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book. Here's my suggested reading for you:

https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/

Marc
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-18 22:51:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Marcus
I have no idea who was responsible for the firebombing of a Republican
campaign office in North Carolina. It would seem logical that the person(s)
who committed this crime were anti-Trump or anti-Republican.
However, the minute I heard about it I was reminded of the infamous
Reichstag fire in Germany in 1933 which Hitler portrayed as the work of
Communists. The fire played a pivotal role in the Nazis rise to power in
Germany, and it came right before an important parliamentary election. Many
historians have concluded that members of the Nazi party set the building on
fire for the purpose of deliberately blaming the communists. The immdeiate
outcome of the fire was Germany suspending many rights of the people(at the
request of Hitler to the then German leadership). And we know what happened
afterward.
Here's what Hitler said after the fire,
"These sub-humans do not understand how the people stand at our side. In
their mouse-holes, out of which they now want to come, of course they hear
nothing of the cheering of the masses."
Here's what Trump said after the North Carolina firebombing,
"Animals representing Hillary Clinton and Dems in North Carolina just
firebombed our office in Orange County because we are winning."
Again, it could very well be that anti-Trump folks bombed the office in NC,
but the similarity in tone and substance between the Reichstag fire and the
North Carolina bombing is quite coincidental, especially right before the
election.
Marc
**************
Hey lookee everyone!
Marcus is campaigning for Hillary!!!
Didn't you say Rand Paul was going to win the presidency and Hillary
wouldn't even get on the ballot?
How many feet can you fit in that mouth?
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president. And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Marcus
2016-10-18 23:18:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president. And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm wrong.
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3 weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.

Marc
Lloyd
2016-10-19 03:12:41 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
"Marcus" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:4d505f51-93f1-499c-a5f6-***@googlegroups.com...
On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 6:51:22 PM UTC-4, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book. Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.

Marc

*******

The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.

That says it all.
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-19 17:52:18 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book. Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
That says it all.
What it exclaims, loud and clear, is an abundance
of hypocrisy. Democrats, in order to be Democrats,
MUST NECESSARILY embrace hypocrisy. They say one
thing but they do just the opposite.

Lying is not a vice but a virtue.

Violence is condoned and practiced openly against
their *enemies*.

Sexual physical violence (rape) against women when
perpetrated by Democrat Bill Clinton and covered up
by his sleazy wife, Hillary, is accepted as the norm
while talking about copping a feel in a locker room
setting by a Republican is a capital offense.

Democrats divide the country into friends and
enemies one the one hand and then sing *Kumbaya*
on the other.

Democrats say, "Can't we all just get along?" but
mean we can't get along with any of you bible
thumping, gun-toting, basket of deplorable hicks.

Democrats say they "care" about minorities yet
the never manage to implement programs that help
minorities.

Democrats say the "rich" need to pay their fair
share but encourage the poor to remain poor via
the lure of "entitlements". Where do Democrats
think the money that supports entitlements come
from? The rich, perhaps, who pay more than their
fair share?

This list could be expanded to hundreds of things
but the point is made by just a few. Democrats
are the ultimate in hypocrisy but, worse yet,
they are not ashamed of being hypocrites. They
view hypocrisy as a virtue.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Lloyd
2016-10-20 02:45:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book. Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
That says it all.
What it exclaims, loud and clear, is an abundance
of hypocrisy. Democrats, in order to be Democrats,
MUST NECESSARILY embrace hypocrisy. They say one
thing but they do just the opposite.
Lying is not a vice but a virtue.
Violence is condoned and practiced openly against
their *enemies*.
Sexual physical violence (rape) against women when
perpetrated by Democrat Bill Clinton and covered up
by his sleazy wife, Hillary, is accepted as the norm
while talking about copping a feel in a locker room
setting by a Republican is a capital offense.
Democrats divide the country into friends and
enemies one the one hand and then sing *Kumbaya*
on the other.
Democrats say, "Can't we all just get along?" but
mean we can't get along with any of you bible
thumping, gun-toting, basket of deplorable hicks.
Democrats say they "care" about minorities yet
the never manage to implement programs that help
minorities.
Democrats say the "rich" need to pay their fair
share but encourage the poor to remain poor via
the lure of "entitlements". Where do Democrats
think the money that supports entitlements come
from? The rich, perhaps, who pay more than their
fair share?
This list could be expanded to hundreds of things
but the point is made by just a few. Democrats
are the ultimate in hypocrisy but, worse yet,
they are not ashamed of being hypocrites. They
view hypocrisy as a virtue.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-20 18:37:03 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Marcus
2016-10-21 01:02:47 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
FDR
Lloyd
2016-10-21 01:30:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-21 20:05:10 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
LOL! And, smackdown on poor, hapless Marcus.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Lloyd
2016-10-21 20:24:36 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
LOL! And, smackdown on poor, hapless Marcus.
--
Between you and I, yes. Marcus would take that as a compliment.
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-21 20:32:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
LOL! And, smackdown on poor, hapless Marcus.
Between you and I, yes. Marcus would take that as a compliment.
You're probably correct, sir. Marcus has got to
be rather deranged in order to believe the things
he espouses in this forum.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Lloyd
2016-10-22 01:09:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
LOL! And, smackdown on poor, hapless Marcus.
Between you and I, yes. Marcus would take that as a compliment.
You're probably correct, sir. Marcus has got to
be rather deranged in order to believe the things
he espouses in this forum.
Comparing the two leading candidates and supposed Democrat ideals:

1. Hillary is richer, can't argue against Trump wealth

2. Hillary has the backing of major corporations, can't rail against
corporations

3. Hillary's record of work success is abysmal, can't rail against that of
Trump

4. Hillary has serious medical problems, can't make health an issue

5. Hillary has serious ethical issues, can't make trust, ethics or integrity
an issue

6. Hillary wants to continue ObamaCare or replace it (depending on what she
says or emails you read), can't make health insurance an issue because Obama
fixed it

7. So on the issues Trump wins almost every one

8. Can't discuss the issues then attack Trump's hair color.

It is just so amazing that as bad a candidate that Trump is, plus the entire
media is against him, he may actually win. That is an indication of how
rotten a person and candidate Hillary Clinton is. But Marcus is all for
her, is it because she represents the highest and best principles and
character that Marcus values? Of course.
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-22 21:18:50 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Lloyd
The Clintons are the penultimate embodiment of the Democratic Party.
Who would be the ultimate? Obama?
No, it would be Marcus
LOL! And, smackdown on poor, hapless Marcus.
Between you and I, yes. Marcus would take that as a compliment.
You're probably correct, sir. Marcus has got to
be rather deranged in order to believe the things
he espouses in this forum.
1. Hillary is richer, can't argue against Trump wealth
2. Hillary has the backing of major corporations, can't rail against
corporations
3. Hillary's record of work success is abysmal, can't rail against that of
Trump
4. Hillary has serious medical problems, can't make health an issue
5. Hillary has serious ethical issues, can't make trust, ethics or integrity
an issue
6. Hillary wants to continue ObamaCare or replace it (depending on what she
says or emails you read), can't make health insurance an issue because Obama
fixed it
7. So on the issues Trump wins almost every one
8. Can't discuss the issues then attack Trump's hair color.
It is just so amazing that as bad a candidate that Trump is, plus the entire
media is against him, he may actually win. That is an indication of how
rotten a person and candidate Hillary Clinton is. But Marcus is all for
her, is it because she represents the highest and best principles and
character that Marcus values? Of course.
The likes of Marcus would rather feel comfortable by
supporting those whose ethics are totally lacking
because, as the old saying goes, "Misery loves
company." Marcus can only feel good about himself
if he surrounds himself with similar reprobates.

Marcus is a typical leftist.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Marcus
2016-10-19 20:40:16 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book. Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
And you aren't. That speaks volumes.
Post by Marcus
That says it all.
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
2016-10-19 22:08:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
<trim>
Post by Marcus
Post by Lloyd
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
And you aren't. That speaks volumes.
Yes, it tells me the man has a moral compass.

Anybody who doesn't reject Hillary has no
ethics, no morals and no scruples.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.

"It is my learned opinion that a man
should not mince words just to spare
the sensibilities of the thin-skinned
or the ignorant."
Lloyd
2016-10-20 02:47:57 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Marcus
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book.
Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
And you aren't. That speaks volumes.
When did I say I wasn't?

Why are you so defensive about supporting Hillary?

Shouldn't you be embracing her?

Why not?

Is something wrong?
Post by Marcus
Post by Marcus
That says it all.
You betcha!
Marcus
2016-10-21 01:02:08 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
Post by Marcus
Post by Marcus
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but despite her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want him as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v. would be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely hope I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book.
Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know until 3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
And you aren't. That speaks volumes.
When did I say I wasn't?
Why are you so defensive about supporting Hillary?
Shouldn't you be embracing her?
Why not?
Is something wrong?
Post by Marcus
Post by Marcus
That says it all.
You betcha!
So, are you voting for Hillary?
Lloyd
2016-10-21 01:31:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Lloyd
Post by Marcus
Post by Lloyd
On Tuesday, October 18, 2016 at 6:51:22 PM UTC-4, Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
Post by Marcus
Hillary is not the candidate I wanted. I wanted Sanders, but
despite
her
flaws, Trump has to be stopped. So I am voting for Clinton.
Yes, I was entirely wrong about Rand Paul. Again, I didn't want
him
as a
candidate, but I thought his greedy and selfish Ayn Rand p.o.v.
would
be
a delight to the Republicans. I would have preferred someone a bit more
mainstream like Kasich. However, Trump, seeking the lowest common
denominator, is the God of the Deplorables, and he won the primaries.
However, what I said about Hillary is that she would never be president.
And that still might be a valid prediction from me...I sincerely
hope
I'm
wrong.
Lloyd, forget about the election, and curl up with a good book.
Here's
https://www.amazon.com/Until-Birds-Chirp-Reflections-Sixties/dp/1532939035/
Marc
Quite the creative back pedal.
--
Sir Gregory Hall, Esq.
There's no back pedal, creative or otherwise. I admit that I was wrong
about Rand Paul being the 2016 Republican nominee. To the best of my
recollection, I stated that Hillary would never be president, not that she
would never be nominated to run for the presidency. We won't know
until
3
weeks from tonight whether I'm wrong about her never being president.
Marc
*******
The bottom line is you are supporting Hillary.
And you aren't. That speaks volumes.
When did I say I wasn't?
Why are you so defensive about supporting Hillary?
Shouldn't you be embracing her?
Why not?
Is something wrong?
Post by Marcus
Post by Lloyd
That says it all.
You betcha!
So, are you voting for Hillary?
No and the correct usage of english would phrase the question: "Are you
going to vote for Hillary".
Marcus
2016-10-21 13:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Lloyd
Post by Marcus
So, are you voting for Hillary?
No and the correct usage of english would phrase the question: "Are you
going to vote for Hillary".
OK, let's add to your title of "Boring old man", the name "Grammar Police man"

OK, so no vote for Trump and no vote for Hillary....wait don't tell me...you are going to vote for the old pot head of the Libertarian Party.
Lloyd
2016-10-21 20:27:15 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Marcus
Post by Lloyd
Post by Marcus
So, are you voting for Hillary?
No and the correct usage of english would phrase the question: "Are you
going to vote for Hillary".
OK, let's add to your title of "Boring old man", the name "Grammar Police man"
From you I take that as a compliment. Remember your assessment of Ferguson?
Of Rand Paul becoming president? Whatever you say has a correlation
coefficient of -1. You are spot on! Thank you!
Post by Marcus
OK, so no vote for Trump and no vote for Hillary....wait don't tell
me...you are going to vote for the old pot head of the Libertarian Party.
You really don't get it.
Loading...