Latest Comments by tntrn

Latest Comments by tntrn

tntrn 16,379 Views

I am happily retired after 35 years of Labor and Delivery nursing. My passions now are two wonderful grandchildren, quilting on my HQ 16, sewing, and going where life takes me with my husband of 28 years. I am primarily conservative with moderate views on a couple social issues.

Sorted By Last Comment (Past 5 Years)
  • 0

    Quote from MunoRN
    It's what both the initial Benghazi investigation found as well as the partisan republican investigation so yes, let's go with what two exhaustive investigations, including one that was intended to be critical of Clinton, determined to be true.

    The purpose of the CIA's directive to not reveal that we knew this was probably not spontaneous was to keep these groups from knowing what we knew through our own media. Unless Chelsea was a member of the terrorist group that attacked the Benghazi compound, telling her didn't get that group any closer to knowing what we knew at the time.

    Would you really have preferred that Clinton publicly reveal what she knew against the directive of the CIA, potentially putting more lives at risk?

    And of course there was the Election to consider. Speaking the truth would have no doubt changed the outcome.

  • 0

    Quote from MunoRN
    Clinton: I'm responsible for diplomats' security - CNN.com

    The CIA testified that it had made the decision to go with "the video" story for a few days after the attack in order to protect their investigation and additional US lives that would have been put at risk if we revealed what we knew at that time. If she had gone against that story at that time it would have been comparable to treason.

    Okay, let's go with that. That still doesn't justify letting Chelsea know the truth in one of those personal emails that had nothing to do with any kind of classified or fragile information.

  • 1
    rnmaybe likes this.

    Quote from Tweety
    I don't think either of us making that statement said it was o.k. I have issues with it.

    However, as I said (and the poster you quote) at least it's an issue that's current, relevant and needs intervention. Benghazi remains a non-issue, whose investigations are complete. Saying "I blame Ms. Clinton for my son's death" makes very good political rhetoric for a grieving mother's cause, but when Ms. Clinton has time and time again taken the blame, survived investigations, it's time to move on and drop it because like it or not all the calls to "lock her up!!" makes people look foolish.

    I'm sure the DNC will have similar moments for sure.
    I must have missed the part where Hillary has taken the blame for Benghazi...part of which was saying it was due to a "spontaneous" protest, and that it was because of a video...and then using those lies for days afterwards......where has that been said and then made public?

  • 0

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    I'm not certain that Benghazi requires any further conversation, time, or resources. At least the grieving mothers at the DNC will be speaking of recent events.
    So that makes it all okay? That Benghazi is not "recent?" That is a very uncaring, cold way of looking at it.

  • 0

    Quote from toomuchbaloney
    In reference to the mothers of the dead, is this exploitation of the deaths of those people, or is it pressing the conversation?
    Whatever it is must be the same for the mothers who appear in both conventions.

  • 0

    I wonder where the fact checkers are on Ivanka's speech....which I liked a lot....but that whole thing about women earning less than men is bunk and has been debunked.....well, once you compare apples to apples.

  • 0

    Quote from Tweety
    I was sure you were going to bring up Hiliary and if not I was going to.

    It is extremely important for the Trump people to taint and spin her as a liar. With his speech he's kind of lost some credibility. We can't say "well Trump was accurate and honest in his speech and look at Hillary with all her lies, spins and half-truths". The best you're going to be able to do is the typical "well your side does it too".

    The difference is that Hillary's lying has been well-documented by no less than the FBI director.....so any talk of Trump trying to taint and spin her as a liar, is just repeating an already known truth.

  • 1
    Tweety likes this.

    Quote from MunoRN
    I'm not sure it's a good thing when a top contender for President surprises us by being "mostly accurate".

    He supported a broad claim using very narrow and carefully cherry picked evidence, and even that was still partly inaccurate. More importantly, what is his plan again? What role is he envisioning for the federal government in local policing?
    It is always interesting to me how both sides spin, spin, spin. Mostly accurate is not so bad,here you are, treating it as if it's mostly inaccurate.

    Given Hilary's documented lying skills, it will be interesting to see how fact-checkers treat her stuff next week.

  • 0
  • 0

    Quote from Tweety
    As the article I posted from 2008 states, it was an issue back then for Obama. No one here say plagiarism isn't worthy of disdain.

    Mrs. Trump was to make the speech of her life. It was her moment to shine. It was the freakin' RNC. She plagiarized from a women that her audience disdains. Sorry, like it or not this is a much bigger deal than what Obama did.

    Michelle Obama's speech in 2008 was stunning and got rave reviews and was the talk to the convention, and turned the tide in Obama's favor in people's minds.

    Mrs. Trump had the same opportunity and blew it and it's a big deal. Republicans disdain what she did to, but rather than call her on it, the only thing say can say is "but Obama did it too".

    Such a bizarre situation, as the speech writer is experienced and intelligent.
    And according to many reports, MO plagiarized in her "stunning' speech as well.

  • 0

    Quote from herring_RN
    From your link:

    They did take responsibility. The link I provided (clearly stating it was not the original one I wanted to link) was from an earlier part of the day. I see that I am not on top of things to suit you.

    The article I did link was from earlier in the day. It does talk about the plagiarism of the Obamas. That was the point of it, not to stress the time line.

    I don't think any of the instances are okay. What is not okay is that this instance is being treated quite differently than that of the Pres and his wife. Either it's all bad and worthy of disdain or none it is.

  • 1
    herring_RN likes this.

    Quote from herring_RN
    There is no link provided. Did the vice president say that or are you just repeating a rumor?

    I'm confused then as to what is meant by "double plagiarism.
    It seems you question whether the First Lady of the United States of plagiarism using words of her husband and Saul Alinsky.


    I wonder what words you think could have been plagiarized.

    Do you now agree with the Trump campaign that the speech at his convention contained plagiarized paragraphs?

    Or do you agree with the original multiple denials?

    Sorry, you are correct, I forgot to provide the link. This link is not the one I had originally, but I cannot find that one now. People won't like this one, but that's too bad.

    Michelle Obama Copied Alinsky in Speech Melania Trump Plagiarized


    "double plagiarism" I made that up. If BHO plagiarized Alinski and then MO plagiarized him plagiarizing him, is that double plagiarism?

    I do not agree that "paragraphs' were plagiarized. At most, it was a phrase or two. It's not like Melania is trying to be President. The idea she expressed is common, and parents everywhere tell their kids that. Hallmark cards MIGHt be what was plagiarized.....because that same message is on every graduation cared there is.

    They took responsibility......

  • 0

    Quote from herring_RN
    Will you please provide the quote from Saul Alinsky regarding family values, honesty, and hard work?
    I looked up who he was:

    I don't believe I even mention a quote from Alinski about those things.....

    Here is a link that includes other plagiarism by several Democrats, including one by MO where she plagiarized Alinksi.

    It is rumored that Joe Biden has said about plagiarism, "everybody does it." Perhaps, but not everybody is taken to task for it.

  • 0

    Quote from Elvish
    Excellent deflection!

    .
    No it is accountability. IF those now calling Melania out, including those who are not Democrats, are the Democrats who have also plagiarized being included in the accountability? Simple question.

  • 0

    Quote from Elvish
    Considering how wowed the right is about their FLOTUS hopeful, and considering that so much of her speech came from a woman the right has spent 8 years practically spitting on, I think it points out a whole lot of hypocrisy and ignorance.

    [IMG]https://scontent-iad3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-0/s526x395/13775601_10153957675333127_9103192975355437125_n.j pg?oh=086c44bb303692af61af8a9f0f8b7c3b&oe=583635EA[/IMG]

    It is worthy to note Michelle's speech used words from one of Barack's and he used words from Saul Alinski. So is that double plagiarism? Do the Democrats take that as a double negative that then negates itself?


close
close