• 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!

Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview On J

Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

The idea that she's a "lunatic" is absurd.

That's the beauty of America. We can all have opinions.

I think she's a lunatic, different from Obama who 8 years ago at this time I thought was just an incompetent. I respected Hillary a lot more in 2008 than I do in 2016.

Just my opinion.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

That's the beauty of America. We can all have opinions.

I think she's a lunatic, different from Obama who 8 years ago at this time I thought was just an incompetent. I respected Hillary a lot more in 2008 than I do in 2016.

Just my opinion.

And you're entitled to it, but I don't see where it's coming from.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

If you're telling the truth, what's the need?

People who are dragged down to testify before Congress, like CEOs, are never given prep questions in advance. Not sure why politicians would be given a chance to review questions when they don't even extend the same courtesy to outsiders.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

And you're entitled to it, but I don't see where it's coming from.

You probably won't, considering our opposing political views.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

You probably won't, considering our opposing political views.

I have no plans to ever vote for Hillary Clinton, but "lunatic"? What makes her a "lunatic"?
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

Hillary is probably just promoting her new book about her experience as Secretary of State. Facing her worst critics now is probably a good move.

Her new book is one of the topics:

The interview will cover an array of topics, including the 2016 presidential election, the 2012 attacks in Benghazi and Clinton’s new book, Hard Choices. Van Susteren most recently interviewed Clinton in January 2013. Fox News Channel's Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview On June 17 - Deadline.com
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

I have no plans to ever vote for Hillary Clinton, but "lunatic"? What makes her a "lunatic"?

I think she's reckless. Again, JMO.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

The idea that she's a "lunatic" is absurd.

Her ideology and experience are all wrong for the job, and expecially now. A leftwing peacenik is not going to work with the way China and Russia are now. There's more, but I don't feel like getting into that now.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

Her ideology and experience are all wrong for the job, and expecially now. A leftwing peacenik is not going to work with the way China and Russia are now. There's more, but I don't feel like getting into that now.

"Peacenik"? We're talking about the same Hillary Clinton, right?
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

It's a book tour. She can simply say..." that is not what I'm prepare to discuss at this time". It brings her exposure. Everyone is talking 3 weeks before the interview.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

"Peacenik"? We're talking about the same Hillary Clinton, right?

I know I always confuse Hillary with Jane Fonda.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

"Peacenik"? We're talking about the same Hillary Clinton, right?

hillary3young.jpg


The one and only.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview


You do know a whole lot more people watch FOX than just Republicans or conservatives? There are quite a lot of people like me that watch FOX during the day, their news programs and do not watch them at all during the evenings when they have their talking heads.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

"Peacenik"? We're talking about the same Hillary Clinton, right?

You know she was a Goldwater girl before she became a Democrat and Bill's wife. Quite a history this gal has.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

Peacenic

hillary3young.jpg




Not...
article-2083002-0F5B49EB00000578-96_306x371.jpg


Who was on the right side of history?
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

You know she was a Goldwater girl before she became a Democrat and Bill's wife. Quite a history this gal has.

I think her college thesis said a lot about how she felt about things in general. Of course people change their minds from time to time, but underlying convictions generally remain constant. If you feel that big government is the way to go, for instance, you aren't likely to go along with those who feel State's rights are more important. And there will always be people who think they're right about everything! :lol:

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

I think her college thesis said a lot about how she felt about things in general. Of course people change their minds from time to time, but underlying convictions generally remain constant. If you feel that big government is the way to go, for instance, you aren't likely to go along with those who feel State's rights are more important. And there will always be people who think they're right about everything! :lol:

Greetings, Pero. :2wave:

Howdy Pol, You know Hillary wasn't the only who changed his/her mind. Reagan was once a staunch Democrat. But as he put it, the party left him, he didn't leave the party. Throughout the 50's and 60's there really wan't that much difference between the two parties. Both had their conservative and liberal wings, it was said during most the this time that the Republicans believed in the same things the Democrats did, only they wanted a little less of it. Goldwater upset that status quo, then McGovern came along and remade the the Democrats from a vigorous Hawk party into a Dove party or as you put it, a peacenik party. In fact, from Wilson to Humphrey who made his run in 1968, the Democrats were the most Hawkish Party while quite a lot of Republicans were isolationists. Things change and will constantly change.

Goldwater was one who told LBJ to either go in and win that damn war or bring our boys home now. One thing about Goldwater, one always knew where he stood on an issue. He left no doubts or gray areas.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

You can bet your ass that FNC had to agree to an Hillary approved script to score this gig.

OMG! Hillary made them agree to limit the questions to certain questions in order to get the interview? Why, that's only been done by EVERY SINGLE viable presidential candidate for the last twenty years. You really nailed her dude. Good job.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

Howdy Pol, You know Hillary wasn't the only who changed his/her mind. Reagan was once a staunch Democrat. But as he put it, the party left him, he didn't leave the party. Throughout the 50's and 60's there really wan't that much difference between the two parties. Both had their conservative and liberal wings, it was said during most the this time that the Republicans believed in the same things the Democrats did, only they wanted a little less of it. Goldwater upset that status quo, then McGovern came along and remade the the Democrats from a vigorous Hawk party into a Dove party or as you put it, a peacenik party. In fact, from Wilson to Humphrey who made his run in 1968, the Democrats were the most Hawkish Party while quite a lot of Republicans were isolationists. Things change and will constantly change.

Goldwater was one who told LBJ to either go in and win that damn war or bring our boys home now. One thing about Goldwater, one always knew where he stood on an issue. He left no doubts or gray areas.

It appears that we need another Goldwater - or at least someone who we feel is looking out for all the people of this country, and not just the party they represent! Do you think we'll ever see it? Keep in mind that miracles do happen! :mrgreen:
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

It appears that we need another Goldwater - or at least someone who we feel is looking out for all the people of this country, and not just the party they represent! Do you think we'll ever see it? Keep in mind that miracles do happen! :mrgreen:

I think Goldwater was unique. He didn't care who he peeved and said what was on his mind. Today, everyone is so careful not to say something that may lose them a vote or two, too afraid to really step on some toes even if what you are saying is the truth. Reagan was in a way like Barry but in a much softer sense. But he didn't back away from calling the USSR an evil empire. Where Barry was coarse in his speech at times, Reagan was always soft and polite, but he got his message across.

I think Perot was in this line too, he was in the middle, not as coarse as Barry and not as soft and polite as Reagan. I can still remember Perot saying, "Look here," then continuing on with his point.

As for future politicians who will say what is on their mind without regard to seeking votes? Nope, none on the horizon I can see.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

I think Goldwater was unique. He didn't care who he peeved and said what was on his mind. Today, everyone is so careful not to say something that may lose them a vote or two, too afraid to really step on some toes even if what you are saying is the truth. Reagan was in a way like Barry but in a much softer sense. But he didn't back away from calling the USSR an evil empire. Where Barry was coarse in his speech at times, Reagan was always soft and polite, but he got his message across.

I think Perot was in this line too, he was in the middle, not as coarse as Barry and not as soft and polite as Reagan. I can still remember Perot saying, "Look here," then continuing on with his point.

As for future politicians who will say what is on their mind without regard to seeking votes? Nope, none on the horizon I can see.

about that interveiw with Hillary that fox arranged to coincide with the release of her new book. guess what? there is a chapter about Benghazi.

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

Howdy Pol, You know Hillary wasn't the only who changed his/her mind. Reagan was once a staunch Democrat. But as he put it, the party left him, he didn't leave the party. Throughout the 50's and 60's there really wan't that much difference between the two parties. Both had their conservative and liberal wings, it was said during most the this time that the Republicans believed in the same things the Democrats did, only they wanted a little less of it. Goldwater upset that status quo, then McGovern came along and remade the the Democrats from a vigorous Hawk party into a Dove party or as you put it, a peacenik party. In fact, from Wilson to Humphrey who made his run in 1968, the Democrats were the most Hawkish Party while quite a lot of Republicans were isolationists. Things change and will constantly change.

Goldwater was one who told LBJ to either go in and win that damn war or bring our boys home now. One thing about Goldwater, one always knew where he stood on an issue. He left no doubts or gray areas.

You are historically correct.
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

about that interveiw with Hillary that fox arranged to coincide with the release of her new book. guess what? there is a chapter about Benghazi.

Exclusive: Hillary Clinton

So I heard. I really haven't paid Benghazi all that much attention. But I did post this a while ago:

Here are some very interesting results on Benghazi by the polling firms of Anderson Robbins Research (D) / Shaw & Company Research (R) which released these today. Apparently most Americans think the Special Committee is a good thing, that the Obama administration lied, but also that the Republicans are only doing this for political gain, that they are not really interested in getting to the truth. Talk about a pox on both houses or should I say parties?

Do you approve or disapprove of Congress establishing a special committee to investigate the U.S. government’s decisions and activities surrounding the September 11, 2012 terrorist attacks on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed four Americans?
Approve 67%
Disapprove 28%
(Don’t know) 4%

In the aftermath of the Benghazi terrorist attacks, the Obama administration incorrectly claimed it was a spontaneous assault in response to an online video, even though the administration had intelligence reports that the attacks were connected to terrorist groups tied to al Qaeda. Do you think the Obama administration knowingly lied about the attacks to help the president during the ongoing re-election campaign, or not?
Yes 51%
No 39%
(Don’t know) 11%

Do you think Republicans in Congress who are investigating the Benghazi terrorist attacks are mostly doing it to get to the truth about what happened or are they mostly doing it for political gain?
Get to the truth 30%
For Political gain 63%
(Don’t know) 7%
 
Re: Fox News Channel’s Bret Baier, Greta Van Susteren Land Hillary Clinton Interview

If you're telling the truth, what's the need?
Well logically if what is being discussed happened a year or more ago, one would like to make sure they can give out accurate information concerning dates and such. I see nothing wrong with knowing ahead of time a lot of the questions that are going to be presented. Before presidential debates begin most candidates know most of the questions that are going to be asked and if not at least the subjects that will be discussed; it's called preparation. I mean it's not like you will be talking to Joe Shmoe in a coffee shop or something. :shrug:
 
Back
Top Bottom