Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/19/16 2:10 PM, Tim wrote:
11:27
- show quoted text -
Actually when I hear the 5 or 6 lines that they are complaining about,
it really just sounds like the same hackneyed phrases most 1st ladies
roll out there about family values and handing things down to your
kids. Martha Washington probably said the same crap 235 years ago.
At least nobody is accusing Melania of plagiarizing Hillary. The
Clintons don't have any family values. At least, like most things
Clinton, "there is no evidence to support that" and "what difference
does it make"?
.....

What difference does it make? Exactly!

Joe Biden plagiarized papers in college and he's Vice President.


Whatever the Trumps do is fine with the Trumpites


Whatever the Clintons did do and would like to do is fine with
you. But, what difference does it make. You are a nobody who
demands no respect from anyone except your dumb kanadian
buddy.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:10:06 -0700 (PDT), Tim wrote:

11:27
- show quoted text -
Actually when I hear the 5 or 6 lines that they are complaining about,
it really just sounds like the same hackneyed phrases most 1st ladies
roll out there about family values and handing things down to your
kids. Martha Washington probably said the same crap 235 years ago.
At least nobody is accusing Melania of plagiarizing Hillary. The
Clintons don't have any family values. At least, like most things
Clinton, "there is no evidence to support that" and "what difference
does it make"?
.....

What difference does it make? Exactly!

That's Hillary's line, isn't it?


She owns it and couldn't give it away if she tried.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 7/19/16 4:10 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:01:38 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:54:42 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:39:38 -0500, Califbill wrote:

wrote:
Why do their speeches sound so much alike ;-)


Same speech writer? Shudder hired Harry?

Great minds think alike?

Actually when I hear the 5 or 6 lines that they are complaining about,
it really just sounds like the same hackneyed phrases most 1st ladies
roll out there about family values and handing things down to your
kids. Martha Washington probably said the same crap 235 years ago.
At least nobody is accusing Melania of plagiarizing Hillary. The
Clintons don't have any family values. At least, like most things
Clinton, "there is no evidence to support that" and "what difference
does it make"?

What's really obvious is that someone (or a "team" of peeps) were tasked with comparing her speech to others and ultimately attacking and try to tear her and Trump apart. You really can't tell me that some reporter remembers phrases used in a minor speech 8 years ago. The LWM discrediting machine is in pedal to the metal mode.

It is only a half dozen throw away lines in a 17 minute speech but it
is also an unforced error. I bet the Donald has fired a few people by
now.



David Frum thinks the latest Trump ****-ups are predictors:

Since Sunday, every journalist at this convention has been collecting
examples of the Trump campaign’s failures and incompetence: the quarrel
with Ohio Governor John Kasich, the absent senators and governors, the
no-show donors, the convention’s financial embarrassments, the floor
fight over rules, the lack of a proper schedule, and the defective apps
and other technology. Suddenly, there is one easy-to-understand incident
that encapsulates in one grim joke all this convention’s cavalcade of derp.

"one grim joke"

Mo

Trump has just vividly demonstrated that his campaign—never mind the
campaign, he himself—have zero skill at crisis management. Confronted
with this comically absurd failure, their instinct is not only to lie,
shift blame, and refuse responsibility, but to do so in laughably
unbelievable ways. It’s all a big joke when the crisis in question is a
plagiarized speech by a would-be first lady. It won’t be so funny when a
President Trump tries to manage a truly life-and-death crisis in the
same blundering, dopey, and cowardly way.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...atters/492038/

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 5:14:03 PM UTC-5, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 7/19/16 4:10 PM, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:01:38 -0700 (PDT), Its Me
wrote:

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 11:54:42 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 10:39:38 -0500, Califbill wrote:

wrote:
Why do their speeches sound so much alike ;-)


Same speech writer? Shudder hired Harry?

Great minds think alike?

Actually when I hear the 5 or 6 lines that they are complaining about,
it really just sounds like the same hackneyed phrases most 1st ladies
roll out there about family values and handing things down to your
kids. Martha Washington probably said the same crap 235 years ago.
At least nobody is accusing Melania of plagiarizing Hillary. The
Clintons don't have any family values. At least, like most things
Clinton, "there is no evidence to support that" and "what difference
does it make"?

What's really obvious is that someone (or a "team" of peeps) were tasked with comparing her speech to others and ultimately attacking and try to tear her and Trump apart. You really can't tell me that some reporter remembers phrases used in a minor speech 8 years ago. The LWM discrediting machine is in pedal to the metal mode.

It is only a half dozen throw away lines in a 17 minute speech but it
is also an unforced error. I bet the Donald has fired a few people by
now.



David Frum thinks the latest Trump ****-ups are predictors:

Since Sunday, every journalist at this convention has been collecting
examples of the Trump campaign’s failures and incompetence: the quarrel
with Ohio Governor John Kasich, the absent senators and governors, the
no-show donors, the convention’s financial embarrassments, the floor
fight over rules, the lack of a proper schedule, and the defective apps
and other technology. Suddenly, there is one easy-to-understand incident
that encapsulates in one grim joke all this convention’s cavalcade of derp.

"one grim joke"

Mo

Trump has just vividly demonstrated that his campaign—never mind the
campaign, he himself—have zero skill at crisis management. Confronted
with this comically absurd failure, their instinct is not only to lie,
shift blame, and refuse responsibility, but to do so in laughably
unbelievable ways. It’s all a big joke when the crisis in question is a
plagiarized speech by a would-be first lady. It won’t be so funny when a
President Trump tries to manage a truly life-and-death crisis in the
same blundering, dopey, and cowardly way.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...atters/492038/

hmmm, I wonder if he'll duck his head while running under sniper fire?

On Tuesday, July 19, 2016 at 10:39:44 AM UTC-5, Califbill wrote:
wrote:
Why do their speeches sound so much alike ;-)


Same speech writer? Shudder hired Harry?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PoE0KLGUs_I

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 18:14:00 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/19/16 4:10 PM, wrote:

It is only a half dozen throw away lines in a 17 minute speech but it
is also an unforced error. I bet the Donald has fired a few people by
now.



David Frum thinks the latest Trump ****-ups are predictors:

Since Sunday, every journalist at this convention has been collecting
examples of the Trump campaign’s failures and incompetence: the quarrel
with Ohio Governor John Kasich, the absent senators and governors, the
no-show donors, the convention’s financial embarrassments, the floor
fight over rules, the lack of a proper schedule, and the defective apps
and other technology. Suddenly, there is one easy-to-understand incident
that encapsulates in one grim joke all this convention’s cavalcade of derp.

"one grim joke"

Mo

Trump has just vividly demonstrated that his campaign—never mind the
campaign, he himself—have zero skill at crisis management. Confronted
with this comically absurd failure, their instinct is not only to lie,
shift blame, and refuse responsibility, but to do so in laughably
unbelievable ways. It’s all a big joke when the crisis in question is a
plagiarized speech by a would-be first lady. It won’t be so funny when a
President Trump tries to manage a truly life-and-death crisis in the
same blundering, dopey, and cowardly way.

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/...atters/492038/


Trump could not be helping Hillary more if he was being paid to ...
and he might be. I wonder what big government contract or regulatory
concession he will land in 2017?
I am sure it would just be a coincidence tho.

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 23:17:35 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

That's just Republican/Teabagger bull****. How is 14 weeks = 2 years?
http://tinyurl.com/79p97z3
"So that means Democrats had an effective filibuster-proof majority for
about 14 weeks."
I'm surprised you tried to get that past a non-wingnut.

I suppose after looking at that, I would say it is a stretch.
"technically" is still "true" so the dems did have 60 from July 7
until Feb 4 when Brown took office so it is more than 14 weeks and I
am curious about haw many filibusters they had in that time when they
were down to 59? (Jan to July)
If it was a problem, why didn't Teddy step down and get Kirk in there
sooner? More of that Kennedy hubris?
I suppose I could go look at Thomas and see but I really do not care
enough to dig through hundreds of bills and look at the votes
I think Mother Jones is cooking the books as much as the wingnuts.

On 7/20/16 1:02 AM, wrote:

This is the strangest election I have seen in my 70 years on this
planet. 3/5ths of the people don't like the most popular candidate and
2/3ds don't like the other one. If there was ever a chance for a 3d
party bid, it is now.



Yeah, right. Except for their platforms and candidates...

On Wednesday, July 20, 2016 at 12:17:34 AM UTC-4, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Tue, 19 Jul 2016 21:45:34 -0500, Boating All Out
wrote:

In article ,
says...

I think that by October, we are going to hear a lot more about her and
as much as the dumbocrats say "what difference does it make", I
suspect it will. The only reason she has a chance is her opponent is
Trump. There are a half dozen other people who would beat her.

Sure, but they are all Democrats.

Why didn't the democrats pick one of them? I ask the republicans the
same question.

HRC had the machine. That's how it works.
The Republicans had.......Trump. It's their speed now.

This is a national death wish. Whoever wins, it will be a disaster.

Are you saying we should change our form of government? Good luck with
that. Besides, it's only unreasonable people that don't get along.
Pretty soon, they won't be elected to public office.
The people won't stand for it.

That has to be the most stupid statement I've read in a long time. The sheeple will continue to elect the people that promise them the most. Being reasonable doesn't play into that equation at all.