• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hillary Clinton agrees to testify on Benghazi, emails this month

Greetings, US Conservative. :2wave:

Thank you, but the differences are too stark to ignore, and it bothers me that our government seems to be trying to make life as difficult as possible for the business world - you know, the entities that provide jobs for people so they can have their income taxed to pay for everything the government wants to spend money on, whether it makes sense or not! :2mad:

When you see that diversion from logic-as in your example-the answer is politics. The left benefits by vilifying the successful and fostering resentment (what a pleasant ideology), and this is just one day to do that.
 
Gowdy is no slouch. He's done good so far. Hillary is the one giving up sound bytes. You should be worried.

share wih us the 'good' that lout gowdy has accomplished thus far
 
share wih us the 'good' that lout gowdy has accomplished thus far

His committee revealed the govt should have increased security around benghazi, discovered Hillary's hidden server, and got her to give sworn testimony.
Progress is made against lying statist power freaks in such ways. :cool:
 
Does the Pope wear a funny hat? The lack of male genitalia in this case will be in her favor so her lies will not be easily outed nor proven. It's smart for her to do this as she can go toe to toe with the Republicans making whatever claims she wants knowing full well if there were any evidence to the contrary, it's been destroyed and those who know about it well on her side and protected. The only way Clinton gets outed as a liar and proven so is to have one of her or Bill's inner circle defect, with evidence in hand. If they defect without evidence in hand they'll be mocked, ridiculed and discarded.

I don't think the evil wench will ever go to jail over it...however the longer it dogs her, the less likely she will become potus in 2016.
 
In other words: "its not an investigation until the come to the conclusion i want"

I just want the truth. For instance, I want to know why her and the administration outright lied for two weeks and pushed that phony "It was the video" story. I also want to know why a rescue operation was not attempted.
 
The reason "this bitch is under so much heat is" the fact the GOP and its candidates are scared ***less by her candidacy and they are now, and will for the entire period of the campaign throw every bit of crap they can possibly grab in an attempt to bring her down.

You are making it up as you go along. Considering Hillary's past...including recent flubs....she is a gift to whichever republican is nominated. If the republicans fear anyone on the democrat side, it would be a possible Elizabeth Warren run. Hillary on the other hand is a drooling nut job. "I dodged sniper fire in Bosnia" indeed.
 
I think Republicans seriously overestimate how much Americans care about Benghazi and Clinton's emails. They want to get her in trouble but aren't they basically using tax payers money to try and help out their parties candidate for next year? So who should really be getting in trouble?

This is not just about Hillary. The Obama admin pushed the "Youtube" video lie for two solid weeks and never came up with a legitimate answer to: Why was there not a rescue mission"?
 
I just want the truth. For instance, I want to know why her and the administration outright lied for two weeks and pushed that phony "It was the video" story. I also want to know why a rescue operation was not attempted.

And have you not been given "the truth"? How are you going to know when "the truth" has been presented? After #10 investigation? #11? How many more?
 
Yes, I do remember that - but it was billions, not trillions, and was probably caused in part by people who bought a house they couldn't afford, and when the "teaser" interest rate became a real interest rate, they defaulted and walked away, leaving the banks with houses they didn't want on their books.

Whatever happened to the "old-fashioned" bankers who wouldn't give you a loan until they verified that you had a job, weren't currently in debt over your head, had never filed for bankruptcy, made sure you could repay the loan they might make to you, and wanted you to produce the past two years of IRS filings to verify your job earnings? That used to be the rules, and banks were sound back then. Hence the saying "you can take that to the bank," which meant it was a sure thing. Not any more, I guess!

The point in my post was to show that American taxpayers are on the hook for nearly $160 trillion dollars for European derivatives - derivatives that are only pieces of paper with nothing backing them! And that's only what I know about, but it's probably more! I know that banks all over the world are tied together, but neither the American taxpayers, nor the Federal Reserve nor the FDIC have the money to cover this outrageous amount, so why does it fall on us to be responsible for it? "Too big to fail" is not our doing! They gambled with the money they received, and it's our fault? Nuts to that! :shock: :thumbdown:

I think businesses in general will become weaker and weaker over time while the government expands and continues to take on the responsibilities that the businesses used to. Look at this past recession and how long it's taken to come out of...I think it's because the government is trying their best to keep people and businesses from failing when I think that's exactly what we need, to fail and to learn those harsh lessons so we can mature and come back stronger. Our economy should have come roaring back, leaner and tougher than before... that didn't happen.
 
I think businesses in general will become weaker and weaker over time while the government expands and continues to take on the responsibilities that the businesses used to. Look at this past recession and how long it's taken to come out of...I think it's because the government is trying their best to keep people and businesses from failing when I think that's exactly what we need, to fail and to learn those harsh lessons so we can mature and come back stronger. Our economy should have come roaring back, leaner and tougher than before... that didn't happen.

Greetings, JC Callender. :2wave:!

Glad to see you back! We missed you! I think government is doing their best to make life rough for businesses, with more and more rules and regulations all the time. Why do you think California is losing businesses, who flee to more business-friendly States? When businesses close, people lose their jobs, then who is left to pay the taxes so the State can spend it?
 
Greetings, JC Callender. :2wave:!

Glad to see you back! We missed you! I think government is doing their best to make life rough for businesses, with more and more rules and regulations all the time. Why do you think California is losing businesses, who flee to more business-friendly States? When businesses close, people lose their jobs, then who is left to pay the taxes so the State can spend it?

Thanks Pg :)
:agree Here in Michigan, Gov. Snyder cut biz taxes and he also cut the state EIC and our economy has been slowly coming back. There's talk of him maybe running for prez, but we here in Mi. are in talks now of raising the sales tax because global warming has caused our last two winters to be two of the coldest on record which has in turn ruined most of our roads, and of course it's nearly impossible to cut entitlements, so they're looking at the sales tax, which won't bode well if he does decide to run.
 
Thanks Pg :)
:agree Here in Michigan, Gov. Snyder cut biz taxes and he also cut the state EIC and our economy has been slowly coming back. There's talk of him maybe running for prez, but we here in Mi. are in talks now of raising the sales tax because global warming has caused our last two winters to be two of the coldest on record which has in turn ruined most of our roads, and of course it's nearly impossible to cut entitlements, so they're looking at the sales tax, which won't bode well if he does decide to run.

Hatuey had a great idea last week - he suggested that people receiving entitlements be required to work to earn part of them, even if it's only a few hours a week. Lord knows there's plenty to be done to repair our infrastructure, etc, so I think it's a great idea and I told him so. Why should those that go to work every day have to pay more taxes, while others don't have to work at all, but get government help with food stamps and rent subsidies when they are able to work, but don't? That isn't fair!
 
Hatuey had a great idea last week - he suggested that people receiving entitlements be required to work to earn part of them, even if it's only a few hours a week. Lord knows there's plenty to be done to repair our infrastructure, etc, so I think it's a great idea and I told him so. Why should those that go to work every day have to pay more taxes, while others don't have to work at all, but get government help with food stamps and rent subsidies when they are able to work, but don't? That isn't fair!

Yeah because why use union workers at middle class wages when welfare recipients will work 8 hours a week for less....

I'm not comfy with the idea of welfare recipients repairing bridges and highways, if a Welfare client is qualified to do that work they're probably either already working or disabled and can't work
 
Hatuey had a great idea last week - he suggested that people receiving entitlements be required to work to earn part of them, even if it's only a few hours a week. Lord knows there's plenty to be done to repair our infrastructure, etc, so I think it's a great idea and I told him so. Why should those that go to work every day have to pay more taxes, while others don't have to work at all, but get government help with food stamps and rent subsidies when they are able to work, but don't? That isn't fair!

It's incredible how politicians get up in arms over the thought of them working too! Same with drug tests, geez, what's the big deal. It has to be for the votes.
 
Yeah because why use union workers at middle class wages when welfare recipients will work 8 hours a week for less....

I'm not comfy with the idea of welfare recipients repairing bridges and highways, if a Welfare client is qualified to do that work they're probably either already working or disabled and can't work

A welfare recipient can hold the "Stop/Go" sign in construction, or shovel blacktop repair into a pothole. There are many manual labor jobs.
 
I've never understood that thinking. Why should they not have to work if they're able bodied? It might help improve their self esteem, and minimize the anger you see when they feel life hasn't treated them fairly.
 
Hatuey had a great idea last week - he suggested that people receiving entitlements be required to work to earn part of them, even if it's only a few hours a week. Lord knows there's plenty to be done to repair our infrastructure, etc, so I think it's a great idea and I told him so. Why should those that go to work every day have to pay more taxes, while others don't have to work at all, but get government help with food stamps and rent subsidies when they are able to work, but don't? That isn't fair!


Oops.

Great idea...on paper and I helped get it off the ground.

It went like this: Vancouver is hosting the Winter Games 2010. There are billions and billions being thrown around for 200 miles of highway through the most challenging terrain on the Pacific Coast, a sub way, skating ovals and, of course, the Olympic Village. And that was this great idea. Make a percentage of the work force people on disability, street people, as laborers and traffic directors etc.

Hmmm, great idea did not allow for drug use, alcoholism and all the **** that got them on disability in the first place. Long and short of it was the developers eventually paid them to stay away; there were accidents, problems, mistakes and the village barely opened on time.

I ran a "social enterprise" company, a registered not for profit for the purpose of creating jobs, regular jobs for those very people. And that was the biggest prob\lem we had, not showing up. When they did, wham! they worked and then some. However, along the way I learned that you have to use an entirely different set of managerial tools and have a system to counter no-shows. And forget profit, if you do not have the not for profit status you die.
 
I worked at headquarters for a multi-national corporation, and experienced first-hand how business differs from government. Business has to make a profit, where the government doesn't have that Damocles sword hanging over its head. Business could never have an $18 trillion debt, as an example, or they would have long since had to file for bankruptcy - so their eye is always on the bottom line. In truth, most of us have the same limitations on our family budgets, so I understand that thinking. What I don't understand is why those in DC seem to think otherwise, and I'm talking both sides of the aisle. Business also seems to be more nimble in making decisions, too; plus a CEO and his advisors can get fired almost immediately if the shareholders get irate enough, so I wonder, if government had to live under the same conditions, if we'd be in better shape financially than we are?. I think we probably would be, because of the accountability factor, and they wouldn't be allowed to keep their job until the next election, either. The only "shareholders" in government are the taxpayers, and few politicians seem to care what we think - until election time comes. Then we're suddenly important again, and the cycle continues, ad nauseum, as lots of promises are made to correct things that aren't working. Weird way to live, but I guess we're used to it. :shock:
I believe the word missing in government employment is, 'accountability'.
 
Yeah because why use union workers at middle class wages when welfare recipients will work 8 hours a week for less....

I'm not comfy with the idea of welfare recipients repairing bridges and highways, if a Welfare client is qualified to do that work they're probably either already working or disabled and can't work

Greetings, EMNofSeattle. :2wave:

I don't know what constitutes a "crisis," but my posted thinking has always been that FDR had the right idea back in the days of the Great Depression. He created all his alphabet agencies, and put men to work. He seemed to understand that men have a need to feel that they are providing for their family, and they loved him for it!
He became a hero to millions of American families! And look at what those legions of men accomplished - national parks we still use today; massive tree plantings that halted soil erosion; building the Grand Coulee Dam that still provides water for that area; water and sewage systems that are still in use today, although they badly need upgrading after 80 years of use; and many other areas that still benefit all of us. It was good honest work, and no one felt demeaned by doing it. They were glad to feel that the money they earned provided for their families when little other work was available. Over the years, I have listened to many old-timers who were young at that time describing the work they did, and how proud they are of what they accomplished, and it sure was interesting to listen to how they lived during that decade of poverty, making the best of a bad situation while still keeping their personal standards high.

I wonder sometimes that if those days come again, whether this generation is capable of meeting the challenge!
 
While this is necessary because she is a criminal you will be watching a re-run of the Michael Corleone testimony in "Godfather II" or that of the former chairwoman of the IRS. She and her hubby are convinced beyond any doubt they look in the camera and lie and simply walk away and to date they are correct.
 
Really? The truth? Really? ROFLMAO, you sure are a kidder.

stay tuned
on the 18th we will see if trey has what it takes to budge her
my money is on hillary to kick his sorry ass in verbal battle
 
Back
Top Bottom