• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: Politics & News... Have at it.

Justin Trudeau's thought of the day:

2ljhtol.jpg
Are you still butthurt?
 
So if lies and/or embellishments are abhorred by leftards, umm....how is it that Hillary remains in such high esteem among your Party faithful?
 
you're a better person than that lameness, David.

Hero Hillary dodging sniper fire in war-torn Bosnia. lol

[video=youtube;8BfNqhV5hg4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8BfNqhV5hg4[/video]

sniper-fire-02.jpg


oewkh.jpg
 
A piece here from Slate on the Ben Carson thing, a well known liberal publication....with an actual reputation for occasional outbreaks of journalism.

*************************************************​

Ben Carson’s West Point Fib Won’t Hurt Him

In fact, it’ll probably help him.

In his acclaimed autobiography, Gifted Hands, Ben Carson says he had an offer and scholarship from the West Point military academy as a teenager, which he declined in favor of Yale University. “I was offered a full scholarship to West Point,“ Carson wrote, describing a meeting with Gen. William Westmoreland. ”I didn’t refuse the scholarship outright, but I let them know that a military career wasn’t where I saw myself going. As overjoyed as I felt to be offered such a scholarship, I wasn’t really tempted. The scholarship would have obligated me to spend four years in military service after I finished college, precluding my chances to go on to medical school."

There are immediate problems here. There are no scholarships to West Point—all costs are covered for all students. And the only way to get an offer is to apply, but the school has no record of Carson’s application. When pressed by Politico, Carson’s campaign conceded he never applied. “He was introduced to folks from West Point by his ROTC Supervisors,” explained his campaign manager, Barry Bennett. “They told him they could help him get an appointment based on his grades and performance in ROTC. He considered it but in the end did not seek admission.”

This prompted a story—“Ben Carson Admits Fabricating West Point Scholarship” was the original title—and a flurry of activity on Twitter, as Carson supporters and conservative defenders attacked Politico for smearing the former neurosurgeon. “It is true, Carson never applied and was never accepted to West Point,” wrote conservative activist Erick Erickson. “The Politico’s representation of that is demonstrably false and is not something Carson claimed.”

So, is Politico right? Did Carson “fabricate” his West Point story?

f you judge by the text of his book, as well as other statements about the same story, the answer is not exactly. Carson never claimed that he applied to the school. And while West Point doesn’t give scholarships, it’s not hard to see how encouragement from authority figures—You’re a shoo-in—becomes, after years of telling and retelling, the tale of an offer and a scholarship. It’s just how memory works.

Carson is guilty of run-of-the-mill embellishment.

it will take more than an exaggeration to tank his ratings with the grassroots. And indeed, the fact that Politico has had to walk back from its initial claims will work in Carson’s favor.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2015/11/ben_carson_s_west_point_fib_won_t_hurt_him_it_will_help_him.html
 
You are projecting your values on me with a question like that, when you indeed would almost certainly vote for a prolific liar like Hill.....

I don't think like you, David. My point is clear. The "left" is gleefully assailing a Republic candidate for values they don't hold their own to.
 
I always get a kick out of "left" vs "right" debate, as if it's some type of Habs vs Leafs game.

The avg human being has liberal views on certain issues & conservative on other ones, no one is 100% leaning, one way or the other.
 
I always get a kick out of "left" vs "right" debate, as if it's some type of Habs vs Leafs game.

The avg human being has liberal views on certain issues & conservative on other ones, no one is 100% leaning, one way or the other.

The most hardcore politicos I know don't follow sports all that closely, hence the need for a jersey to call their own.

Meanwhile, I have voted for all the major parties at some point or another. Context is everything. Idealogues can kiss my ass. Most of their cherished assumptions don't hold up indefinitely, yet they never change their mind.
 
The most hardcore politicos I know don't follow sports all that closely, hence the need for a jersey to call their own.

Meanwhile, I have voted for all the major parties at some point or another. Context is everything. Idealogues can kiss my ass. Most of their cherished assumptions don't hold up indefinitely, yet they never change their mind.

Yeah, pretty much this.
 
I always get a kick out of "left" vs "right" debate, as if it's some type of Habs vs Leafs game.

The avg human being has liberal views on certain issues & conservative on other ones, no one is 100% leaning, one way or the other.

I agree totally... I mean are people born to side with one parties slate of views on everything? Can you be anti-abortion yet also anti-death penalty and be so sure which party speaks for you? If you are anti-abortion does that make you then side with the pro-gun movement, a hawk mentality on foreign issues and an everyone for themselves attitude towards social problems which all really run the opposite way of the pro life movement?

I have basically voted Liberal all my life in elections but this past Fed election I wanted the Conservatives to win. It doesn't mean I now support all of the so called right's agenda nor would I step in and defend them if a debate popped up over, say... guns or abortion. I find too many people have to check the party guide platform before deciding what stance they should take on a topic. Then they defend it like the former Iraqi Information Minister or like WeHave in one of his anti-Romo rants.

The main problem with the US politics is the two party system. The fact you must choose between one or the other is deflating but worse yet it gives the party leaders false latitude that they have the majority view on every one of their issues. I don't believe America is as divided as ever but when the two parties can't even agree on who called who first you know nothing will get done.
 
Back
Top