General Discussion

Sheepshank

(12,504 posts)

113. tee hee hee heee +1

Reply to OilemFirchen (Reply #111)

Tue Mar 10, 2015, 05:37 PM

Mar 2015

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

134 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

If Hillary doesn't speak out at the UN today against the Iran letter, she will signal to the world [View all] leveymg Mar 2015 OP

I hope she does this. blm Mar 2015 #1

Support the president Yes! voteearlyvoteoften Mar 2015 #2

You're correct, but I'm not holding my breath Schema Thing Mar 2015 #3

so many people ended up looking pretty silly over this type prognostication Sheepshank Mar 2015 #92

I wonder what her advisor thinks? n2doc Mar 2015 #4

Hillary Clinton says 'not there yet' on women's equality Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #5

She's already announced she will do a presser on the email matter. She'll look very self-interested leveymg Mar 2015 #6

She is not doing that as part of her meeting at the UN. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #7

As they say in Real Estate, "location, location, location." Silence conveys a powerful message, leveymg Mar 2015 #9

Since she is a private Citizen, she should join DU and make a statement. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #11

She's the presumptive Democratic candidate and the former Secretary of State. leveymg Mar 2015 #15

Ridiculous. Not a single primary or caucus has been held. She is going to speak on Women's Rights. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #18

If she talks about email, she should address this. She can simply say, "I do not support the leveymg Mar 2015 #21

That's right. The UN chose her by pulling her name out of a hat. She's just another American. Scuba Mar 2015 #37

The UN chose her becasue 20 years ago she appeared at the Beijing Conference. (See link) Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #69

you may want to go back and edit all of your presumptive posts Sheepshank Mar 2015 #74

If she supports women's rights, then she will oppose War. Women suffer from War more than from sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #34

So you are saying that Obama opposed Women's rights? I did not know that. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #72

You can think what you want, you don't 'think' for me.. So let me 'think' for you then. sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #94

I did not think for you. You equate supporting war with opposing women's rights. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #106

France committed us to and planned the invasion of Libya for months before sabrina 1 Mar 2015 #112

President Obama went into that war with eyes open. Agnosticsherbet Mar 2015 #116

I'm not sure she should address it at all. This issue already involves a Logan Act violation for stevenleser Mar 2015 #8

As usual, we agree to disagree. leveymg Mar 2015 #12

Don't you think NOT signing leftynyc Mar 2015 #27

Yup. Agschmid Mar 2015 #78

That is exactly what I was thinking. Jamastiene Mar 2015 #99

She needs to address that she was asked to do something stupid... Agschmid Mar 2015 #77

This. Agschmid Mar 2015 #76

he was wrong as usual Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #88

it does no such thing. but feel free to say so anyway nt msongs Mar 2015 #10

I doubt that she will mention it, sadoldgirl Mar 2015 #13

Recommended. H2O Man Mar 2015 #14

All Democrats especially on a world forum should speak out .. here's what Iran's minister just said Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #16

Now, if talks break down, it is the US which will look the spoiler. One would think the former SOS leveymg Mar 2015 #17

I consider this a chance to make and stand for peace Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #20

So that is proof that the 47 republican undermined the POTUS during a time of war Rex Mar 2015 #120

If asked by the media... Spazito Mar 2015 #19

That would work for me. leveymg Mar 2015 #22

Andrea Mitchell just dropped a hint that HRC may talk about the Iran letter. "Something substantive" leveymg Mar 2015 #23

She led witth it BainsBane Mar 2015 #24

The next complaint will be, she was too strong or too weak in mentioning it. nt stevenleser Mar 2015 #26

She did a great job with it. The concern of timing was warranted blm Mar 2015 #29

But we were promised praise by the OP. randome Mar 2015 #30

Mark is a straight-shooter. He's not a BSer and shouldn't be taunted. blm Mar 2015 #31

Taunting? I'm asking for the OP to deliver what was promised. randome Mar 2015 #32

See #33, below. leveymg Mar 2015 #35

Pathetic attempt. FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #122

We got faint praise! joshcryer Mar 2015 #43

The servers should be turned over to the Archivist, if she is to be compliant w/the 1950 law. leveymg Mar 2015 #56

I'm the data will be. joshcryer Mar 2015 #61

"Clinton is making sure to keep everything close. No bullshit, no room for error." Yet, she erred leveymg Mar 2015 #91

Your praise is noted! joshcryer Mar 2015 #93

I praised her for her Iran letter statement. Right on! But, she still has to dig herself leveymg Mar 2015 #57

She never said she deleted them. joshcryer Mar 2015 #62

We'll see when this gets rewound later today. leveymg Mar 2015 #89

Totally fake scandal. joshcryer Mar 2015 #90

If it was a "totally fake scandal" everyone on MSNBC would be saying that. They aren't. leveymg Mar 2015 #105

oh FFS Sheepshank Mar 2015 #97

''I'm not sure she should address it at all. '' post 8 Ichingcarpenter Mar 2015 #54

and the presumptions made fools of more than one person today Sheepshank Mar 2015 #79

I hope you are listening to Hillary Clinton as I am... Spazito Mar 2015 #25

GOOD! She brought it up - Good on her for taking it on FIRST. blm Mar 2015 #28

Congratulations on addressing this issue, first. Good move, Mrs. Clinton. leveymg Mar 2015 #33

She said about half were personal BainsBane Mar 2015 #36

That's different from what we heard before, and we now know that 30,000 were deleted, another 5,000 leveymg Mar 2015 #39

This is the first we have heard from her BainsBane Mar 2015 #40

The State Dept regs aren't the issue. It's the law that she should have preserved and conveyed the leveymg Mar 2015 #47

She said unequivocally that she did not delete a single email. joshcryer Mar 2015 #50

When she turns over the server, that might be confirmed, depending upon how it was set up. leveymg Mar 2015 #53

Official business went to .gov addresses. joshcryer Mar 2015 #65

That was less than half of it. The other 30,000 or so were deleted. leveymg Mar 2015 #68

Where did the "other 30k" go? joshcryer Mar 2015 #73

Yes. Official email to non-US government officials. Foreign officials, business people, etc leveymg Mar 2015 #84

Proof? joshcryer Mar 2015 #86

She complied with the law as it existed at the time BainsBane Mar 2015 #63

That's what she says. The deletion of 30,000 email was bound to raise more questions. leveymg Mar 2015 #75

To what committee, Benghazi? BainsBane Mar 2015 #80

I agree. The GOP just twist things around into false narratives until real events lose all meaning. leveymg Mar 2015 #85

And you're there right with them BainsBane Mar 2015 #87

It's hard to stop a hanging party DemocratSinceBirth Mar 2015 #95

so on top of your ASSumption that she purposfully detracted from the GOP kerfuffel Sheepshank Mar 2015 #100

Your faint praise is encouraging. joshcryer Mar 2015 #41

See #33, Josh. leveymg Mar 2015 #49

Half assed congrats FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #121

Oy vey. William769 Mar 2015 #38

Mitchell said a recent poll indicated 87 percent of likely Dem voters could see themselves BainsBane Mar 2015 #42

Well I have been accused of being a 1 percenter. William769 Mar 2015 #45

Oh, I remember that very well BainsBane Mar 2015 #48

Me too. William769 Mar 2015 #51

Now that she has spoken, what is your assessment? Did she still do it wrong? Hekate Mar 2015 #44

This reads like satire after her presser. Where can I find the OP of praise you said she'd have Bluenorthwest Mar 2015 #46

Yes, praise, indeed. joshcryer Mar 2015 #52

The thing is the OP affects that Hillary's statement would be some hugely important world moment Bluenorthwest Mar 2015 #58

Judging from the crowd in the UN press gallery, that was a world important event leveymg Mar 2015 #66

No, you are perfect, don't ever change a thing. There was no ironic hypocrisy in your tactics here, Bluenorthwest Mar 2015 #71

What should I change? The point of this is that she made a firm statement on the Iran letter. As leveymg Mar 2015 #96

It was definitely a significant moment. joshcryer Mar 2015 #67

OP says her silence would have been definitive, but her actual words are not really worth mentioning Bluenorthwest Mar 2015 #81

Went from "she should receive praise" to "30k emails!" joshcryer Mar 2015 #83

Praise on her handling of one issue doesn't preclude continued skepticism about the other. leveymg Mar 2015 #98

Yeah, damning with faint praise. joshcryer Mar 2015 #102

Isn't "damning with faint praise" pretty much the same as saying "didn't applaud vigorously enough"? leveymg Mar 2015 #103

1 post of praise, what, 2 dozen of condemnation? joshcryer Mar 2015 #104

Really, I said it all in #33. leveymg Mar 2015 #107

The OP doesn't mention emails. joshcryer Mar 2015 #108

The rest of her presser was about emails. And she was considerably less forthcoming leveymg Mar 2015 #115

+1 Couldn't agree more! B Calm Mar 2015 #55

This is like the "North Korea" criticism of one GOP Senator for not clapping vigorously enough. leveymg Mar 2015 #59

Now that she has-- and quite forcefully, I believe we should damn her with faint praise LanternWaste Mar 2015 #60

she did samsingh Mar 2015 #64

Hey...your presumption ws wrong...care up update your title? Sheepshank Mar 2015 #70

crickets lol B Calm Mar 2015 #82

... William769 Mar 2015 #101

No. I'm glad there wasn't a worst case outcome with Hillary about the Iran letter. leveymg Mar 2015 #109

you yourself are diverting from your own OP now and have done so since mid-thread Sheepshank Mar 2015 #110

There were two major issues in her presser. I don't want to lose sight of that. leveymg Mar 2015 #117

backpeddlaing in your own manure isn't very efficient. Sheepshank Mar 2015 #118

She's the one who wrapped her address to the world around an announced presser about email. leveymg Mar 2015 #123

ya sure...you like, don't like, change you mind, rechanged it and then blame HRC for you moving the Sheepshank Mar 2015 #127

Perhaps if you post some more, you could at last make your point. johnnyreb Mar 2015 #129

You mean, is this the sort of spectacle of ambivalence we should expect if she's the candidate? leveymg Mar 2015 #130

Ambivalence buys time...and maybe allows the right approach to stumble forth. Octafish Mar 2015 #134

I have a very high threshhold for embarassment... OilemFirchen Mar 2015 #111

tee hee hee heee +1 Sheepshank Mar 2015 #113

She did the right thing. I'm relieved. What's to be embarrassed about? leveymg Mar 2015 #114

perhps re-reading your own OP, and at least 1/2 doz of your responses will answer your own question Sheepshank Mar 2015 #119

In the last analysis, its clear that a lot of people are angry that HRC didn't resolve her problems. leveymg Mar 2015 #124

+1 FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #126

+1 FLPanhandle Mar 2015 #125

It's an amazing feat, ain't it? zappaman Mar 2015 #128

I notice that none of you guys are saying I'm wrong about any of this. leveymg Mar 2015 #131

Transcript... Octafish Mar 2015 #132

Please tell me what you think of #130 above. leveymg Mar 2015 #133