General Discussion

bigtree

(93,321 posts)

122. when you present some relevant ones

Tue Jun 17, 2014, 02:08 PM

Jun 2014

. . . and stop engaging in diversion, distraction, and obfuscation tactics.

You don't even have ONE piece of physical evidence placing Hillary Clinton at ANY meeting with the 'Fellowship' outside of the National Prayer Breakfasts they organized.

Show me ONE piece of verifiable evidence which does as much as PLACE Hillary Clinton at ANY meeting with the 'Fellowship' outside of the National Prayer Breakfasts they organized.

No photo, no eyewitness account . . . but we should believe Hillary was associated with the worst of that organization. It's been since 2007. Where's the physical evidence? Dates, times, locations?

Since 2007 no one has produced anything more than those brief second, third-hand accounts and a quote from 1993? You must think people are idiots to spread that crap here.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

195 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The issue is "The Family"...not "religion". [View all] Ken Burch Jun 2014 OP

there is no one that has reported on them more than Rachel Maddow. VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #1

In the primaries, I'm truly not sure. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #2

Depends on who is running... SkyDaddy7 Jun 2014 #9

EW is not going to run against Hillary.....stop dreaming.....she is friends with HRC! VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #41

You say that as if it goes without saying that HRC will sweep the primaries. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #47

she is far and away the front runner who can kick the assof any Repblican polled VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #50

Funny, you just said you weren't supporting any candidate. n/t. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #52

yeah i support the primary winner.....and she sure looks like a winner to me VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #54

She has to win them first, though. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #79

its hers for the taking right now and i am a democrat VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #191

Remember how she swept the primaries in '08? SheilaT Jun 2014 #67

Stop with the DRAMA... SkyDaddy7 Jun 2014 #190

i dont do drama.....I voted for Obama VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #193

Good one!! SkyDaddy7 Jun 2014 #195

Untrue about Maddow and irrelevant about her endorsements. JackRiddler Jun 2014 #17

and who is he? VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #40

You have no reason to assume she'd back HRC in the primaries. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #48

It doesn't matter who Maddow backs. JackRiddler Jun 2014 #118

She should not be supporting any one individual candidate SheilaT Jun 2014 #20

She doesnt and neither do I. I vote for whoever wins the Primary..... VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #43

I would imagine she can support whoever she chooses to at any point treestar Jun 2014 #56

If she does, I would lose respect for her too. It would mean she has sold out. sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #49

Thank you, Ken Demeter Jun 2014 #3

Based on her history, she will always resist calls to repudiate, apologize, or admit error. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #5

I see the same personality flaw and strategic flaw and agree Demeter Jun 2014 #6

Has Warren "repudiated" voting Republican? KittyWampus Jun 2014 #11

I think that's what you could call everything she's done since 2011. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #14

Warren also needs to address her Republican past. Sorry. Were you around during Reagan? Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #28

OK, I respect what you're saying there Ken Burch Jun 2014 #32

All due respect Ken, equal rights under the law IS in economic issue. Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #35

Fine-ALL potential candidates should be vetted-and all should be anti-homophobia. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #46

No, the thread is not about Warren, but in this thread and all others Nay Jun 2014 #57

Not my intent here at all. n/t. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #80

I'm on your side, Ken. The issue you bring up in your OP is a valid one, Nay Jun 2014 #85

Yes, she left the Party and became a Democrat. She repudiates their economic policies sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #51

The sad part is in 2008 it made all the sense in the world nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #64

why should she? VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #44

Do you do anything but snipe? bobduca Jun 2014 #61

I tell the truth you call it sniping. But i dont blame you......I would lash out to if i was about VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #63

Your posts here sound way too arrogant and demanding. That tone won't help HRC. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #81

can she afford to "break faith" with The Family? frylock Jun 2014 #93

If you hear... doxydad Jun 2014 #4

du rec. xchrom Jun 2014 #7

One Begets The Other cantbeserious Jun 2014 #8

She's a member still? Well Warren VOTED REPUBLICAN. She WAS A REPUBLICAN. KittyWampus Jun 2014 #10

Warren has zero to do with Hillary and the Family. morningfog Jun 2014 #12

Pointing out the blatant hypocrisy of the loudest whingers is my point. KittyWampus Jun 2014 #15

So you don't want Hillary, but defend her association morningfog Jun 2014 #18

Maybe she'll draw you a map of her position. HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #19

I found one. progressoid Jun 2014 #21

Have I defended Hillary's pandering? No. And I'd love to hear someone ask her KittyWampus Jun 2014 #45

OK, about this Warren thing-- Jackpine Radical Jun 2014 #42

This message was self-deleted by its author Ken Burch Jun 2014 #27

I appreciate that that is where you are at - but I don't think you speak for everybody. el_bryanto Jun 2014 #13

You fail to understand that those of us targeted by the Family are aware of her association with Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #22

You should try being honest when you represent my position, rather than distorting it. el_bryanto Jun 2014 #26

What is your position? That post was you typing about what you think OTHERS think. Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #31

I didn't speak for anybody who wasn't mean - I spoke to my impressions of the site as a whole el_bryanto Jun 2014 #34

But that doesn't fit with Le Taz Hot Jun 2014 #16

I can't find any evidence that she's a member. Do you have any? N/T Chathamization Jun 2014 #23

Read this: truebluegreen Jun 2014 #29

“Attended a prayer group that’s associated with The Family” and “member of the Family” are different Chathamization Jun 2014 #37

her autobiography has glowing words for Coe nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #60

Does her autobiography say she was a member of The Family? Excerpt? N/T Chathamization Jun 2014 #68

She attended for 15 years and has glowing words for Coe nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #69

So then the answer is "no, she's not a member of The Family"? N/T Chathamization Jun 2014 #71

The answer is *not now* nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #73

As I wrote above, she attended a prayer group that was associated with The Family. And all the Chathamization Jun 2014 #76

We are NOT talking of the prayer breakfast here nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #77

So once again, no evidence she's a member of The Family? If the charge is that she wrote glowing Chathamization Jun 2014 #78

Those you chose to applaud in your political writing nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #87

You think I won't believe something that's true about her (she's a member of the DLC) because I Chathamization Jun 2014 #92

Whatever, at this point all I can say is whatever nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #95

Sure; if you ever find evidence of her being a member of The Family, feel free to post it. N/T Chathamization Jun 2014 #97

Her praise of Coe is damming and quite frankly it is enough for me nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #98

"Whether or not the accusations are true isn't important because the person did other things I don't Chathamization Jun 2014 #100

Her words are in her book nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #102

I never disputed her words; I asked for evidence of her membership. And since you are now ignoring Chathamization Jun 2014 #103

I am not ignoring the issue nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #107

Fair enough; if you ever manage to find evidence that she is/was a member of The Family, feel free Chathamization Jun 2014 #109

Her own words nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #112

I don't think the Family issues membership cards, buddy Demeter Jun 2014 #140

"You want another president who cavorts with EVIL?" No, but all of them have for the past 60 years Chathamization Jun 2014 #144

you didn't answer the question bigtree Jun 2014 #72

Not now is the precise answer nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #75

Did you read the article? truebluegreen Jun 2014 #82

Yes. It was 4 pages long and didn't provide any evidence that she's a member of The Family. Next Chathamization Jun 2014 #91

for me the issue is religion bowens43 Jun 2014 #24

Several Methodists told me yesterday the Family is the same as Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #25

Sometimes there is a very fuzzy line between religion in general SheilaT Jun 2014 #30

Candidates who profess any philosophy or faith need to answer very specific questions Bluenorthwest Jun 2014 #33

You want to criticize Hillary for involvement in "the family" because you associate it Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #36

Both are valid lines of thought, and require scrutiny. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #39

Elizabeth Warren repudiated the Republican Party and is now a Democrat. sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #55

figures Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #58

"Religion is a disguise". AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #38

Non religion is a disguise. Thinkingabout Jun 2014 #59

Yes, a lack of a disguise is a disguise. AtheistCrusader Jun 2014 #66

Right. Because in this country, if you're running for office it's a huge advantage to be an atheist. Arugula Latte Jun 2014 #90

Why not? treestar Jun 2014 #53

Yea, yeah, it's not about Hillary, it's about The Family. Beacool Jun 2014 #62

And wrote glowingly about Coe in her autobiography nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #65

you're delusional if you believe an ultra-right wing cabal embraced Hillary Clinton as an associate bigtree Jun 2014 #70

Yeah, you are right, we all imagined this too nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #88

you're a reporter? bigtree Jun 2014 #94

The personal attacks by you are getting hysterical at this point nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #96

that's right. I'm attacking your integrity and truthfulness bigtree Jun 2014 #99

Yup, you are engaged in the true route of the true coward nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #101

it's hard to get a fix on you bigtree Jun 2014 #104

So I imagined her writing her praise of Coe nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #105

a quote from 1993 bigtree Jun 2014 #108

More dissembling from you nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #110

the quote proves nothing bigtree Jun 2014 #114

You are right, amateur hour nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #116

use your reporting skills for something more than gotcha politics bigtree Jun 2014 #120

When you deal with facts we can nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #121

when you present some relevant ones bigtree Jun 2014 #122

Please proceed nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #123

the quote isn't evidence of anything except that she likes the man's religiosity bigtree Jun 2014 #125

You are right, what a joke nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #126

there it is, the diversion from the subject bigtree Jun 2014 #127

A smear, based on her own words *published in 2003* nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #128

yes, you've distorted her 1993 words in a smear bigtree Jun 2014 #129

2003 are you having trouble with the years here? nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #130

that's even worse for whatever you're selling here. She described meeting Coe in 1993? bigtree Jun 2014 #131

I am selling? m'kay nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #132

selling bigtree Jun 2014 #134

Her words dear, by the way I did not say she was a member nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #135

your words bigtree Jun 2014 #136

Again, she did attend for fifteen years, more than just a prayer breakfast, nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #137

you claim she 'attended' (something) for 15 years bigtree Jun 2014 #139

Her own biography nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #141

let's see bigtree Jun 2014 #142

What part of her own bio are you still arguing against nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #143

I ask you for proof she 'attended' anything for 15 years and I get yet another song and dance bigtree Jun 2014 #145

HER OWN FRACKING BIO, that she wrote herself nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #146

so, nothing to back up your claim bigtree Jun 2014 #147

Her own biography nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #148

post the paragraph. post the text that proves your claim bigtree Jun 2014 #149

And I do not care about fanatics nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #150

you can't back your claims. Fine. Back up the one you just made bigtree Jun 2014 #152

Keep digging, please do proceed nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #153

so you can't even provide proof of your claims about me bigtree Jun 2014 #154

Keep digging nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #155

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #156

Continue the personal attacks nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #157

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #160

Please proceed nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #161

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #163

Not that it matters nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #164

that article says nothing about 'attending' something for 15 years bigtree Jun 2014 #167

You are that thick? Yes you are nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #168

'well-known' bigtree Jun 2014 #169

keep digging nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #170

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #171

Keep digging, you were alerted by another member nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #172

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #173

I am calling you what you have done nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #174

I'm calling your effort here lousy reporting bigtree Jun 2014 #175

Keep digging nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #176

okay bigtree Jun 2014 #177

I told you to your face what I believe what you are due to your behavior nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #178

that's some messed up stuff bigtree Jun 2014 #179

More personal attacks YEEPERS! nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #180

yet, you feel free to lecture me about cynicism and boosterism . . . bigtree Jun 2014 #181

Please proceed nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #182

how'd that alert work out? bigtree Jun 2014 #183

I don't play those games nadinbrzezinski Jun 2014 #184

The issue is hatred for Hillary Clinton BainsBane Jun 2014 #74

Maybe you should pay attention. Maybe you should WANT to know more about sabrina 1 Jun 2014 #83

I don't play fantasy presidential league BainsBane Jun 2014 #86

Not hatred...legitimate discussion. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #84

She's not a candiate BainsBane Jun 2014 #89

Wait, Hillary and "The Family" randys1 Jun 2014 #106

it's a rehash of everything that's been discussed for days here bigtree Jun 2014 #111

You have me confused with someone else, I have never heard of this before randys1 Jun 2014 #113

well read a bit, randy. You're here practically every day bigtree Jun 2014 #115

Never saw this thread here and I watch Rachel daily and read many randys1 Jun 2014 #117

take some responsibility for your own posts bigtree Jun 2014 #119

Here's link to Rachel's interview about "The Family" KoKo Jun 2014 #124

And Democrats should not associate themselves with this fascist cult, ever, in any way. nt Zorra Jun 2014 #133

K&R! Thank you. Enthusiast Jun 2014 #138

"the issue" is hatred of the female Democratic front runner and the ability to smear her like VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #151

How is she the front-runner? HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #158

Easy peasy....she has the support of the majority of Democrats AND she beats the pants off any VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #159

But she's not a candidate yet. HooptieWagon Jun 2014 #162

Still the front runner... VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #165

We've had a LOT of people who were "frontrunners" two years BEFORE the primaries. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #188

Its still hers if she wants it.... VanillaRhapsody Jun 2014 #166

They aren't "ideologues" Ken Burch Jun 2014 #185

People who think that "winning for winning's sake" are enthusiastic about her. Ken Burch Jun 2014 #186

Disagreement with her conservatism(centrism is conservatism)not "hatred". Ken Burch Jun 2014 #187

I say give it a rest ... sunnystarr Jun 2014 #189

K&R Jamastiene Jun 2014 #192

Mean old sexist and bigoted DU'ers hate methodists!!! bobduca Jun 2014 #194