Bill Clinton slams Obama's past 8 years.

During a speech in Spokane, Washington, Clinton encouraged individuals in the audience to vote for his wife, Hillary Clinton, so the country could “put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us.”

Bill Clinton wrote:If you believe we can all rise together, if you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that where we were practicing trickle-down economics with no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash, then you should vote for her,”

Wow, Bill. Tell us what you really think about Obama.

Nice try at some tasty right-wing propaganda there, "Independent" Thoughts, but unfortunately for you and your agenda, I found the entire video. If you'd like to see what Bill Clinton actually said about the Obama years, all you have to do is skip to 3:50 in the video. That provides the beautiful truth of ... context

Oh, just wanted to ask as well -- if you're so independent, why are you relying on a YouTube channel called "GOP War Room" to tell you what to think? Shouldn't you be seeking out the context and deciding for yourself? Or does "independent" mean "letting a political party drag me by the nostrils"?

Come on, Ben...  
You have no problem refraining from calling me a "stupid liberal" or a "spineless Democrat" when I'm criticizing the conservatives and Republicans.  But if I so much as imply any wrongdoing by the Dems and liberals, I'm automatically Ronald Reagan incarnate.  
Can we give the labeling a break, already?

I saw the entire video, but posted the portion that was relevant to my post.
Yes, I think Bill caught himself after he said what was really on his mind, and tried to mitigate his earlier comment by tossing a few daisies in the air.

Ben wrote:Shouldn't you be seeking out the context and deciding for yourself?

You saw the video.  You heard what ole' Bill clearly said.  You have rich context in my original quote:

Bill Clinton wrote:if you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that where we were practicing trickle-down economics with no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash, then you should vote for her

In that one sentence, you clearly see he is referencing presidential terms -- Obama's, and Bush's. That's context. Are you arguing otherwise?

IndependentThoughts wrote:Come on, Ben...  
You have no problem refraining from calling me a "stupid liberal" or a "spineless Democrat" when I'm criticizing the conservatives and Republicans.  But if I so much as imply any wrongdoing by the Dems and liberals, I'm automatically Ronald Reagan incarnate.  
Can we give the labeling a break, already?

I saw the entire video, but posted the portion that was relevant to my post.
Yes, I think Bill caught himself after he said what was really on his mind, and tried to mitigate his earlier comment by tossing a few daisies in the air.

Ben wrote:Shouldn't you be seeking out the context and deciding for yourself?

You saw the video.  You heard what ole' Bill clearly said.  You have rich context in my original quote:

Bill Clinton wrote:if you believe we’ve finally come to the point where we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that where we were practicing trickle-down economics with no regulation in Washington, which is what caused the crash, then you should vote for her

In that one sentence, you clearly see he is referencing presidential terms -- Obama's, and Bush's. That's context. Are you arguing otherwise?

Yes, I am, because everything Bill Clinton said in praise of Obama's tenure came before that plucked-out quote -- not afterward, as you're trying to claim here.

I'm just asking you to be honest. When you juxtapose the quote from your video with the 12-plus minutes of praise he gave in the video I posted, what is your honest appraisal of Bill Clinton's opinion? Do you think he didn't mean to praise Obama's job creation, or the millions of Americans who can now afford health care thanks to the Affordable Care Act?

This is your crucible -- either you show yourself to be fair-minded as you yourself claim, or expose yourself as nothing better than a dishonest right-wing hack -- which I, I'm sure you'll recall, have been calling you out as since you began your campaign to deceive the rest of us here.

Or better yet, say nothing, stand on your previous statements and let the rest of the membership here decide for themselves.

And by the way, I've never called anybody a "stupid liberal" or "spineless Democrat" In fact, the fact that "spineless Democrat" is in your vocabulary at all betrays which tribe you really call your own

You're trying really hard to defend your team. Bless your heart.

Ben wrote:When you juxtapose the quote from your video with the 12-plus minutes of praise he gave in the video I posted...

From 3:50 to 5:50 is 2 mins. Not 12.

I'm just asking you to be honest.

I am. 2 mins is not equal to 12. He gave Obama his politically obligatory 2 mins of "Atta boys". Not 12, as you've mistakenly stated.

either you show yourself to be fair-minded as you yourself claim

Being an Independent does not equal being an Obama fan, any more than 2 equals 12.
Bill went off script and spoke is his mind. What was really on his mind.

Tell us, Ben...
What was Bill referring to when he said, "...we can put the awful legacy of the last eight years behind us and the seven years before that where we were practicing trickle-down economics with no regulation in Washington..."?

Your posts never address that. You simply walk around it.

Quid pro quo.
Show yourself to be as fair-minded as you yourself claim, and as honest as you've requested me to be. Tell us what you honestly believe Bill is talking about, in reference to the past 8 years.

No, he went on praising Obama's achievements for the whole video. I suggest you actually watch it.

Just admit you're a Republican.

Ben_Reilly wrote:No, he went on praising Obama's achievements for the whole video. I suggest you actually watch it.

Just admit you're a Republican.

How utterly childish, with an inability to debate.

"you are blah blah, that makes me think, I am your superior, blah, blah, blah"

On consecutive threads with Independent, you are showing yourself up to being a sanctimonious dick, failing to address points, only ever able to accuse

Again it shows why you have a complete lack and an inability to listen to others

Grow the fuck up you silly child

You are another one that has zero ability in Empathic Intelligence

Seriously didge, what is with you today?!
Can you not debate without getting shirty?

eddie wrote:Seriously didge, what is with you today?!
Can you not debate without getting shirty?

We have a full moon tomorrow.

eddie wrote:Seriously didge, what is with you today?!
Can you not debate without getting shirty?

Shirty??

I am speaking factually about Ben

Again i will speak as I please if within the rules
..
I also see the little rat is scratching at your feet for some left over scraps.

personal I would not feed the animals  

"Grow the fuck up you silly child" is rude.
Telling him you think he's "a silly child" isn't.

You know the difference didge. Please rein it in.

eddie wrote:"Grow the fuck up you silly child" is rude.
Telling him you think he's "a silly child" isn't.

You know the difference didge. Please rein it in.

I do not care if you find it rude, its not against the rules

Go to a PG guided forum if it bothers you that much

Of course the reason you are only saying something is because you suck up to Ben.,

Yes didge that's why

And when it's you insulting sassy I am sucking up to sassy
And when it's you insulting Zack I am sucking up to Zack
And when it's you insulting rags I am sucking up to rags
Etc etc

And then vice Versa

eddie wrote:Yes didge that's why

And when it's you insulting sassy I am sucking up to sassy
And when it's you insulting  Zack I am sucking up to Zack
And when it's you insulting rags I am sucking up to rags
Etc etc

And then vice Versa

Point of order

i admit when out of order and throw abusive insults,. of which i certainly have today, but criticism of a individuals religious aspect is not an insult and for you to even claim that it is. Then wrongly defends a belief from criticism
That is wrong on every level
But telling someone to grow the F**k up, is because they were being a weasel in the debate, trying to some invented superiority by accusing the other poster of supporting a political party, when that poster is independent and does accuse him constantly of this. Then clearly ben is acting like a child and defecting from the debate, because he cannot answer Independent.

But hey, it shows i see far more of what goes on than you the mod, being as I actually read through threads

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Yes didge that's why

And when it's you insulting sassy I am sucking up to sassy
And when it's you insulting  Zack I am sucking up to Zack
And when it's you insulting rags I am sucking up to rags
Etc etc

And then vice Versa

Point of order

i admit when out of order and throw abusive insults,. of which i certainly have today, but criticism of a individuals religious aspect is not an insult and for you to even claim that it is. Then  wrongly defends a belief from criticism
That is wrong on every level
But telling someone to grow the F**k up, is because they were being a weasel in the debate, trying to some invented superiority by accusing the other poster of supporting a political party, when that poster is independent and does accuse him constantly of this. Then clearly ben is acting like a child and defecting from the debate, because he cannot answer Independent.

But hey, it shows i see far more of what goes on than you the mod, being as I actually read through threads

http://www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Periods-heavy/Pages/Introduction.aspx

I'm glad you've admitted that youve been abusive today.

Find me an inspirational story. This is where you excel IMO

eddie wrote:I'm glad you've admitted that youve been abusive today.

Find me an inspirational story. This is where you excel IMO

I am only one of the few people here who are honest and admit to things if wrong or said wrong

point of order

Ben was out of order and by you jumping in, allows him a free pass to continue poorly deflecting by constantly accusing Independent of being a republican

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:I'm glad you've admitted that youve been abusive today.

Find me an inspirational story. This is where you excel IMO

I am only one of the few people here who are honest and admit to things if wrong or said wrong

point of order

Ben was out of order and by you jumping in, allows him a free pass to continue poorly deflecting by constantly accusing Independent of being a republican

Indy takes one line out of a speech in which Clinton praises Obama up and down, and makes it out as though Clinton slammed Obama.

Only Republicans do things like that.

IndependentThoughts wrote:Come on, Ben...  
You have no problem refraining from calling me a "stupid liberal" or a "spineless Democrat" when I'm criticizing the conservatives and Republicans....................

Ben wrote:Shouldn't you be seeking out the context and deciding for yourself?

You saw the video.  You heard what ole' Bill clearly said.  You have rich context in my original quote......................

WHEN has anybody truly witnessed any genuine independant thinking from "Independent thoughts" ?!?


HOW long has it been since we have seen him actually "criticizing the conservatives and Republicans........"   ?

Didge wrote:
...................

How utterly childish, with an inability to debate.

"you are blah blah, that makes me think, I am your superior, blah, blah, blah"

.........................................

THIS has to be one of the best analyses of "Independent Thoughts" unfettered bigotted posturings and constant rehashing of silly Republican propaganda pieces that I have yet seen on here !

WELL said, Mr. Dodge.  I didn't know you had it in you..

Of course, I think no one in American buys this Republican pablum that the Obama administration was/is a failure.  Republicans are notorious for making up lies...why not a grand lie that wraps it all up?

The truth is that Obama will go down as one of the three greatest presidents ever...along with Lincoln and, say, Jefferson or Roosevelt.  He has performed superbly, not only against the adversity that fate throws up, but against active opposition of McConnell and his RW obstructionists in the Congress.  Obama is a Saint, and there's no other way that Americans view it.

Of course Bill Clinton is not going to bad-mouth the Obama administration.  His wife was an integral part of that administration, FCS!  

What the clip in the OP stands for is the kind of lies that Republicans engage in, when not working against America, the nation, obstructing it's best interests.  Take Benghazi.  Take emails.  Take the IRS office in Ohio.  Republicans just make this shit up, and then act as if it's real.

Republicans have to engage in this style of politics because of who they are.  Whereas Democrats represent the general interest, Republicans represent special interests.  The great flaw in the Republican reasoning is, backing economic interests doesn't get you many votes...there are only so many millionaires.

So, they use diversionary tactics.  They invent little falsehoods and leave them around like little turds, for people to smell and stink up the place.  Sometimes they leave massive dumps, like the Iraq war...claiming that Saddam was responsible for 9/11, or that he has WMDs.  Other times it is like this sweeping lie, that the Obama administration wasn't a success.  Each pile is guaranteed to be 1) a lie; and 2) designed to be emotional, designed to distract you from the fundamental truth: Republicans are working against the interests of the people.  

Like the interests they represent, Republicans are a burden we must bear.  I only hope Donald Trump brings the whole thing down around the lot of them all.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:I'm glad you've admitted that youve been abusive today.

Find me an inspirational story. This is where you excel IMO

I am only one of the few people here who are honest and admit to things if wrong or said wrong

point of order

Ben was out of order and by you jumping in, allows him a free pass to continue poorly deflecting by constantly accusing Independent of being a republican

Indy takes one line out of a speech in which Clinton praises Obama up and down, and makes it out as though Clinton slammed Obama.

Only Republicans do things like that.

to be fair even if Indie is Republican he is still better than most Republicans

veya_victaous wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:


Indy takes one line out of a speech in which Clinton praises Obama up and down, and makes it out as though Clinton slammed Obama.

Only Republicans do things like that.

to be fair even if Indie is Republican he is still better than most Republicans

Purveying in petty lies and political deceit? Depends on what you mean by 'better'. For me, at that level, it's all the same. There might be better strategies, but a lie is simply a lie.

Republicans immediately seized on the comment, with the Republican National Committee arguing that the comment "is about as off message as you can get" in an email to reporters.

A Bill Clinton aide later clarified that the former President was "referring to the GOP's obstructionism and not President Obama's legacy."

The former President regularly heralds Obama, especially while campaigning for Hillary Clinton, a candidate who has gone lengths to tie herself to the legacy of the two-term Democratic President.

http://www.click2houston.com/news/national/bill-clintons-comment-about-gop-obstruction-misconstrued

So much for that.

Didge wrote:

eddie wrote:Yes didge that's why

And when it's you insulting sassy I am sucking up to sassy
And when it's you insulting  Zack I am sucking up to Zack
And when it's you insulting rags I am sucking up to rags
Etc etc

And then vice Versa

Point of order

i admit when out of order and throw abusive insults,. of which i certainly have today, but criticism of a individuals religious aspect is not an insult and for you to even claim that it is. Then  wrongly defends a belief from criticism
That is wrong on every level
But telling someone to grow the F**k up, is because they were being a weasel in the debate, trying to some invented superiority by accusing the other poster of supporting a political party, when that poster is independent and does accuse him constantly of this. Then clearly ben is acting like a child and defecting from the debate, because he cannot answer Independent.

But hey, it shows i see far more of what goes on than you the mod, being as I actually read through threads

That's not what you did - you chose to attack me personally for absolutely no reason, and then said you would so whenever you felt like it. How you can sit there and criticise someone else for being childish and for thinking they're superior is a mystery.

I don't care what you think of my religious beliefs - you're just a jumped up bully anyway.

Where has Sassy gone by the way?

nicko wrote:Where has Sassy gone by the way?

I don't know. There was a reference to another forum which has allegedly been "recruiting" from here, so maybe she went there, or maybe she has her own forum now. Maybe she's busy or not well. Didge is clearly looking around for someone else to pick on though as she's not been here.

Ben wrote:Indy takes one line out of a speech...

A very telling line, at that.

Ben wrote:Only Republicans do things like that.

Only political fanatics that idolatrize their party talk like that.

Ben's article quote wrote:A Bill Clinton aide later clarified that the former President was "referring to the GOP's obstructionism and not President Obama's legacy."

And, again, only a political fan boi would take this explanation seriously on its face, instead of what it actually is: an extenuation for going off-script, by deflecting.
There’s only one thing terribly wrong with Bill’s explanation and feeble attempt to minimize the damage of his rant: The Democrats held both House and Senate majorities during Obama's first two years as President. The Democrats could have passed any bill they wanted, and often did, without Republican intervention or interference.

Wiki wrote: In the November 4, 2008 elections, the Democratic Party increased its majorities in both chambers, giving President Obama a Democratic majority in the legislature for the first two years of his presidency.
...
This Congress has been considered one of the most productive Congresses in history in terms of legislation passed since the 89th Congress, during Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/111th_United_States_Congress

Hmmm... Most productive Congress in history? Either Billy is counting on the Democrat minion having short memories, or Billy is the one with memory loss. OR, he could just be backpedaling his words from his speech, as I've already suggested.

Dr. OQ wrote: There might be better strategies, but a lie is simply a lie.

What’s up, Doc?
You wouldn’t happen to be implying that anyone in this thread is lying… would you?
Especially since we’re still waiting for you to apologize for lying to the community, as a whole, when you proclaimed to be a Dr. Lawyer.
http://www.newsfixboard.com/t13719-hillary-clintons-emails-donald-trump-and-moving-through-scandal

A supermajority is a filibuster-proof 60 or more Senate seats, allowing one party to pass legislation without votes from the other,

Don’t forget: the president needed a supermajority because of the Republicans’ unprecedented use of the filibuster as an obstruction tactic — they’ve used it more than 400 times.

But here’s the deal — the real deal — there actually wasn’t a two year supermajority.

This timeline shows the facts.

President Obama was sworn in on January 20, 2009 with just 58 Senators to support his agenda.

He should have had 59, but Republicans contested Al Franken’s election in Minnesota and he didn’t get seated for seven months.

The President’s cause was helped in April when Pennsylvania’s Republican Senator Arlen Specter switched parties.

That gave the President 59 votes — still a vote shy of the super majority.

But one month later, Democratic Senator Byrd of West Virginia was hospitalized and was basically out of commission.

So while the President’s number on paper was 59 Senators — he was really working with just 58 Senators.

Then in July, Minnesota Senator Al Franken was finally sworn in, giving President Obama the magic 60 — but only in theory, because Senator Byrd was still out.

In August, Senator Ted Kennedy of Massachusetts died and the number went back down to 59 again until Paul Kirk temporarily filled Kennedy’s seat in September.

Any pretense of a supermajority ended on February 4, 2010 when Republican Scott Brown was sworn into the seat Senator Kennedy once held.Do you see a two-year supermajority?

I didn’t think so.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-m-granholm/debunking-the-myth-obamas_b_1929869.html

Indy, you Republicans are in for a reckoning. There's a very good chance that the Democrats are going to have the majority in both houses, along with the White House, by this time next year. At least you'll be able to go on pretending to be independent here, because it looks like Democratic power is going to be the American way of life for years to come.

I'd still like you to find one instance of me ever using the phrase "spineless Democrat" to describe you or anyone else, as you claimed I have done.

Well, Ben.  I guess you'll have to decide for yourself who/what you want to believe.
On one hand, I've given you a Wiki link with a bibliography of links that cite its references.
On the other hand, we have a copy-paste of someone's rant from some blog.
I think I'll take my references on this one, thanks.

Ben wrote:I'd still like you to find one instance of me ever using the phrase "spineless Democrat" to describe you or anyone else, as you claimed I have done.

I've never claimed any such thing.
Here, I'll quote what I said:

The Mighty Independent Thoughts wrote:You have no problem refraining from calling me a "stupid liberal" or a "spineless Democrat" when I'm criticizing the conservatives and Republicans.

In other words, you are very capable of not addressing me as "stupid liberal" or a "spineless Democrat"; however you release a torrent of name-calling and anger-riddled posts if anyone so much as posts anything closely resembling anti-Everything-that's-not-mainstream-liberal.
Glad I could clear that up.

OK, when have you ever criticized conservatives?

And as far as my post goes, you can verify all the facts elsewhere. The Democrats didn't have a supermajority, which they would have needed to overcome non-stop Republican obstructionism.

Ben wrote:And as far as my post goes, you can verify all the facts elsewhere.

LOL!  Way to do your homework and fact-check that blog post, Ben.
That's like copy and pasting one of Original Quill's post and saying, "See!  There!  Told ya' so!"

And we all know how OQ likes to talk about unicorns, purple dragons, and other made-up fictional fairy tales...

Indolent Thoughts wrote:
Dr. OQ wrote:

Original Quill wrote:There might be better strategies, but a lie is simply a lie.

What’s up, Doc?

You wouldn’t happen to be implying that anyone in this thread is lying… would you?

Especially since we’re still waiting for you to apologize for lying to the community, as a whole, when you proclaimed to be a Dr. Lawyer.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t13719-hillary-clintons-emails-donald-trump-and-moving-through-scandal

Of course I'm suggesting you are lying.  For the most part Ben has just proved that.

As far as my credentials are concerned, most of the people on this site already know them; some have looked me up on the Bar Association Directory, and at least one has seen my doctoral dissertation on the University website.

But, realize, this is not about me.  That's just your protective ploy to put me on the defensive.  I don't care...I'm sticking with the topic.

This is part of a continuing discussion we have about how Republicans must live a lie in order to survive.  Republicans represent special interests; the other party represents the people.  There are not enough special interest votes to get Republicans elected, so the Republicans have to fabricate skits and scripts, and try to lead people by the ring in the nose: Saddam was behind 9-11; he has WMDs; Hillary did something wrong at Benghazi (they don't even know what); and Hillary used a private email server (which was perfectly legal).  You see?  Little lies...little lies everywhere.

And here you come and try to pull this little lie over on us about how Bill Clinton is adverse to Obama.  It's a total non sequitur, because all Bill has to do is deny it--which he did--but as Joseph Goebbels said, Tell a lie often enough...

It's a cheap way of politics.  People are finding that out about Republicans.  Right now Donald Trump and Ted Cruz are publishing naked pictures of each other's wives...how's that for getting votes?  The American public has sussed Republicans out...WMD's indeed!!!  The Party is lost to history.  All that's left is trash.  Even you call yourself "independent" to try to distance yourself.  Your own instinct tells you they are lost.

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, when have you ever criticized conservatives?

And as far as my post goes, you can verify all the facts elsewhere. The Democrats didn't have a supermajority, which they would have needed to overcome non-stop Republican obstructionism.

YOU KNOW, Ben,  I've been on here for some two years...

AND I can't think of one time that I've seen Indy post even one item criticising the Republican Party..

IndependentThoughts wrote:Well, Ben.  I guess you'll have to decide for yourself who/what you want to believe.
On one hand, I've given you a Wiki link with a bibliography of links that cite its references.
On the other hand, we have a copy-paste of someone's rant from some blog.
I think I'll take my references on this one, thanks.

ARE YOU really that ignorant, oh Insolent Turkey,  that you don't realise that once you cite "Wiki" links as your main reference, you are losing any remaining threads of credibilty among most forum members ???

AND considering that most of your posts have been c&p'd rants from various RW sources and unreliable news rags, your attempted rejoinder to Ben really is full of holes..

NOT to worry, non-independent one -- for one day you will probably graduate from high school,  and go off chasing your dream job as an adviser to the GOP !

And while the crassest member of this site sits in his corner and does weird things to himself...

I present you this. A flock of liberal hens, feeling very swooney about Trump. You saw it here first.
When have ANY of you ever seen the girls from The View ever feel great about a Republican?

Oh, OQ... you responded, too.
Nice.
You still need to explain to everyone why you think attorneys should be addressed as, "Doctor".

Independent Thoughts wrote:Oh, OQ... you responded, too.
Nice.
You still need to explain to everyone why you think attorneys should be addressed as, "Doctor".

No, that much is self-evident. Wouldn’t you rather I explain why you describe yourself as INDEPENDENT?

You have been deceived, and as a result you feel betrayed. Yes, the Republican flim-flam was played on you. The lying...the fooling. Going back to March 2003, you were lied to by the great, strong-jawed Republicans who, it turns out, could do wrong. Failure after failure was handed to you: a failing, protracted war; an economy brought to the brink of a second Great Depression. The failure of tax cuts. The failure of banks. The failure of the iron-belt and the auto industry. Those failures were not just miscalculations, but the deliberate consequence of the lies you were told.

What’s in a lie? It’s a misdepiction, for sure. It’s a devious framing. But that’s not all. It’s a lack of confidence in one’s listener: that lonely, grim feeling you have—that makes you call yourself “Independent”—is actually the realization that you are not considered a part of the in-crowd. Republicans didn’t just lie—after all, they are the universal flim-flam men—they lied to you. You invested your confidence in them, and they repaid you by lying to you.

Add to that your gut-rumblings of racism and seeing a black president elected, and you see the bottom slipping out from under you. What America considers normal is leaving you. They are electing blacks. Accepting gays. Embracing Hispanics. They are even treating women as equal, non-menstruating creatures, alien from your back-rooms.

Liars to the left of you…jokers to the right…stuck in the middle with…nothing. So you call yourself ‘Independent”, as if that will clean off the dirt you feel coming in from the right. You want to abandon the Republican Party, not merely because they lied to you, but as a rebellious act, bespeaking the anger and disgust. But you don’t want to go over to the—horrors! —left and become one of those unspeakable nigger-lovers, those freeloaders, those weaklings, who actually care about people. You want back inside, you want to rejoin the flim-flam men, and chuckle over how you just fooled another joker.

So you do the next best thing: you create a new movement. Your rally around this absurd figurehead, who says things even more ridiculous than his haircut. Really! And you don’t give a shit, because a part of is not to connect to reality, but just to vent your anger and frustration.

And there’s your Independence, IT. Like a babe, you’re not doing anything but shitting your pants. You are not independent…you’re locked into venting your anger. You are as much a slave as the ‘little-people’ you once laughed at when you thought you were one of the flim-flam men.

Enjoy it, IT. Vent that anger! Revel in the destruction. Every mother knows how a 3-year old behaves in a temper tantrum, do your best approximation. We'll be watching...

IndependentThoughts wrote:Oh, OQ... you responded, too.
Nice.
You still need to explain to everyone why you think attorneys should be addressed as, "Doctor".

YOU really are such an infantile little brainfuckedd moron,  aren't you Ms Non Thinker !!!

ARE you really so stupid that you don't know that the term "Doctor" refers to somebody who has a Ph.D.  ???

AND that medical doctors who don't have a Ph.D. only get to use the title of Dr as a "honorific".
Other non-medical and para-medical practitioners, such as dentists, physio's, chiropractors, dentists and vet's don't get to add "Dr." to their qualifications until they actually gain a Ph.D.

BEING the clueless little buffoon that you are, no doubt you're running off to the 'net to find yet another puerile and useless comeback to try on your betters on here..
HOW old are you, Indy --  14   ?

@OQ
You might want to keep your posts short. When I come across your posts, I usually lose interest after the first couple of pretentious sentences.
You're lonely, don't have many friends, and not happy with your life. That's why you hang out here and try to portray yourself in a false and bloated image. You think proclaiming yourself to be a doctor adds credibility to your words and respect to your name. It does neither. Your driveling and lack of depth on any subject you speak on gives you away as a wannabe.
You still seem to be pretty butt-hurt about me exposing you as a fake and fraud. All I can say is quit lying and you won't have to worry about being called out for it. Simple as that.

@Who's Yer Daddy
You're late to the conversation, Potty Mouth. Click on the link I posted, above. You should feel fortunate that I allow you to bask in my presence and learn from my wisdom. Go read my posts and enlighten yourself. You will feel much better after gaining clarity from my words and educating yourself with them.

IndependentThoughts wrote:@OQ
You might want to keep your posts short.  When I come across your posts, I usually lose interest after the first couple of pretentious sentences.
You're lonely, don't have many friends, and not happy with your life.  That's why you hang out here and try to portray yourself in a false and bloated image.  You think proclaiming yourself to be a doctor adds credibility to your words and respect to your name.  It does neither.  Your driveling and lack of depth on any subject you speak on gives you away as a wannabe.
You still seem to be pretty butt-hurt about me exposing you as a fake and fraud.  All I can say is quit lying and you won't have to worry about being called out for it.  Simple as that.

@Who's Yer Daddy
You're late to the conversation, Potty Mouth.  Click on the link I posted, above.  You should feel fortunate that I allow you to bask in my presence and learn from my wisdom.  Go read my posts and enlighten yourself.  You will feel much better after gaining clarity from my words and educating yourself with them.

+1

IndependentThoughts wrote:@OQ
You might want to keep your posts short. When I come across your posts, I usually lose interest after the first couple of pretentious sentences.
You're lonely, don't have many friends, and not happy with your life. That's why you hang out here and try to portray yourself in a false and bloated image. You think proclaiming yourself to be a doctor adds credibility to your words and respect to your name. It does neither. Your driveling and lack of depth on any subject you speak on gives you away as a wannabe.
You still seem to be pretty butt-hurt about me exposing you as a fake and fraud. All I can say is quit lying and you won't have to worry about being called out for it. Simple as that.

@Who's Yer Daddy
You're late to the conversation, Potty Mouth. Click on the link I posted, above. You should feel fortunate that I allow you to bask in my presence and learn from my wisdom. Go read my posts and enlighten yourself. You will feel much better after gaining clarity from my words and educating yourself with them.

Have you got any basis in fact for all that nonsense? Let me advise you as a lawyer, you simply spouting things off will only reveal someone with masturbation on the mind...you're just playing with yourself, because you ain't dealing with the real world. To a real logical positivist, words must be denotative...they must connect to things in the real world. You build your claims with verification. Your's is complete fantasy.

You're angry and upset. You are the type who gets upset. I believed we showed that with your name...where you are disaffected from the Republican Party, because you feel you have been let down.

I don't know much about you, except what you reveal here. But I think the character portrayal is nearly complete. You don't accomplish much, because you are a reactor, not an initiator. You also don't finish things very often...you might say you have a certain attention-deficit. You identify ("Independent Thoughts") yourself as politically dissociative. Your tone reflects a bitterness one might connect with the recent let down of a past political identity.

I mention this because the malaise is altogether too common today. You are a Donald Trump supporter. You like the rash, yet undisciplined nature of his message. You like insults. You like offending with political-incorrectness. You are the last of the lingering white racists...you hate Hispanics and want a voice to say so; you hate women, and your mother probably got you angry or perhaps, let you down; you prefer iconoclastic statements--such as old soldiers who "got caught" are losers--as they manifest both your anger, and your inner hurt (there's nothing like slapping back, harder, eh?).

You’re also intelligent. At least, you have figured out enough to realize when someone is insulting you. You knew that there was some shit going down when that war lasted that long, or when the economy collapsed in 2008. You knew those tax-cuts were bullshit. And…FGS…when a black president came to the rescue, and was so successful at it, to boot, you knew all the world was up-side-down. But you were on the outs…there’s nothing like being rejected. And to be rejected by flim-flam men, in addition.

Well, Independent, as you've probably already learned, you've chosen a lonely life. Because you emphasize yourself, and the pain you feel, over other people...you have no 'people' skills, and you don't work well with people. But you are used to being alone. The reason why Donald Trump can’t be rebuked for some of his abrupt insults is that you love it…you love slapping back. You have this great, big hole in you that can’t be filled. The pundits are all wrong…you don’t reason that it’s all the media, or that Washington DC is the enemy…you just exist to hate. It’s that simple.