DC Tom Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Not to mention, if a Republican made the joke, the media would be asking EVERY Republican to denounce the person and joke, and then the person who told the joke would have to go on the Al Sharpton/Jesse Jackson apology tour before finally being forced into the final atonement for their racism; going down on Paula Dean on the Cooking Channel. I just read something about Hillary's VP nominee possibly being a "young Latino male." I commented asking if she'd announce her nominee in a timely fashion, or on "Spic time." I'm gonna be the first person ever banned from the entire internet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reddogblitz Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I just read something about Hillary's VP nominee possibly being a "young Latino male." I commented asking if she'd announce her nominee in a timely fashion, or on "Spic time." Mañana Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I just read something about Hillary's VP nominee possibly being a "young Latino male." I commented asking if she'd announce her nominee in a timely fashion, or on "Spic time." I'm gonna be the first person ever banned from the entire internet. Hillary's nickname is Span? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 CPT? I've never heard that before. So when's the backlash on this? No backlash. That's a term African American's themselves use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted April 13, 2016 Author Share Posted April 13, 2016 No backlash. That's a term African American's themselves use. Oh, so it's like nigga! I get it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 "Rich entitled WASP blames Italian-American mayor married to a black woman for racial joke" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 No backlash. That's a term African American's themselves use. HiLIARy and Not-So-Slick Willy (DeBlasio) are black? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 I just read something about Hillary's VP nominee possibly being a "young Latino male." Oh, great - it's probably going to be one of those annoying Castro brothers ( Julian & Joachin, not Fidel and Raul ). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 Oh, great - it's probably going to be one of those annoying Castro brothers ( Julian & Joachin, not Fidel and Raul ). Julian Castro, 40 - Texas. Current job: Secretary of H.U.D It's because of all the great things that he has accomplished that allows him to be next in line to the U.S. Presidency. Alright........................it's because of his pigmentation and his last name. Hillary: Why Yes My Proposals Require a $1 Trillion Tax Hike When asked specifically about her tax policy and how she plans to pay for proposed infrastructure "investment," Clinton admitted her plan to pay for campaign proposals will require a $1 trillion tax hike over the next ten years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 HiLIARy and Not-So-Slick Willy (DeBlasio) are black? No but it's pet phrase used in the African American community. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 How HiLIARy "helped" another country: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/04/13/how-hillary-helped-ruin-haiti.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 THE HILL: Clinton’s dismal approval ratings prompt Dem fears. Hillary Clinton’s favorability ratings are historically low and increasingly a concern for her supporters. Clinton is now viewed unfavorably by 55 percent of the electorate, according to the HuffPost Pollster average, which tracks findings from 42 different polling outfits. Only 40.2 percent of people view her favorably, according to that average. An Associated Press/GfK poll released last week also found 55 percent giving Clinton an unfavorable rating. In the most recent Gallup poll, released late last month, her unfavorable number was 53 percent versus only 42 percent who saw her favorably. Even Democrats acknowledge those findings are a problem. “They’re pretty bad,” said Democratic strategist Brad Bannon, who connected the poor poll numbers to separate findings that show a broad number of Americans don’t trust Clinton. “The No. 1 reason that her favorability is so bad is that you have large numbers of Americans who say they don’t trust her,” he said. “I could make it sound more complicated than that, but that’s really what it is. Voters see her as the ultimate politician, who will do or say anything to get elected.” Well, that’s basically true. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 14, 2016 Share Posted April 14, 2016 Money influences everyone, including Hillary: http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/apr/14/money-hillary-clinton-banks-oil-links-presidential-campaign The Clinton campaign has spent the last few weeks furiously pushing back at the criticism that she is influenced by the vast donations her campaign receives from backers in the oil and financial industries. Her supporters have been vigorously arguing there’s no evidence of a quid pro quo. How quickly they forget. As journalist David Sirota reported earlier this week, in the 2008 Democratic primary campaign, Clinton harshly criticized then senator Obama for accepting donations from oil and gas executives – and even cut a campaign commercial about it. The kicker? It was less money than Clinton has accepted from people working for fossil fuel companies so far this campaign season. ************************************ To protect Hillary, Democrats wage war on their own core Citizen's United Argument: https://theintercept.com/2016/04/14/to-protect-clinton-democrats-wage-war-on-their-own-core-citizens-united-argument/ That key argument of the right-wing justices in Citizens United has now become the key argument of the Clinton campaign and its media supporters to justify her personal and political receipt of millions upon millions of dollars in corporate money: “Expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption” — at least when the candidate in question is Hillary Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 "No executive is too big to jail". HRC in tonight's debate... this after it took her all but two sentences into the debate to bring up 9/11. What a fraud. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 "No executive is too big to jail". HRC in tonight's debate... this after it took her all but two sentences into the debate to bring up 9/11. What a fraud. There's a debate tonight?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 There's a debate tonight?? Kinda. CNN is moderating, so it's all Clinton. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Hillary has to be losing her mind at the thoughts of this primary slipping away... to Bernie Sanders of all people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 "No executive is too big to jail". HRC in tonight's debate... this after it took her all but two sentences into the debate to bring up 9/11. What a fraud. How about an executive secretary. Say, of State? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 Hillary’s Equal Pay Hypocrisy Democratic front-runner has long history of underpaying her female employees The Left’s champion of women has a long history of paying her female employees less than their male counterparts — something Hillary Clinton left out of her Equal Pay Day speech on Tuesday. “If CEOs and board members will actually ask themselves ‘How sure are we we that we are paying people the same?’ the data shows even in the best-intentioned companies that is often not happening,” Clinton said at a roundtable discussion. “It is way past time to end the outrage of so many women still earning less than men on the job.” But perhaps Clinton should take a look in her own backyard. The Clinton Foundation is paying male executives significantly more than female executives, according to documents first obtained by the Daily Caller. TheFoundation’s 2013 IRS 990 form shows that on average male executive earn at least $109,000 more than their female counterparts. What’s more, the Clinton Foundation isn’t the only place associated with the Democratic front-runner that has a history of paying females less. Mrs. Clinton paid her female Senate staffers 72 cents to every dollar that male staffers were paid -- a fact confirmed by the Clinton campaign. When Mrs. Clinton was a senator, the median annual salary for a woman working in her office was $15,708.38 less than the median salary for a man. Where is the outrage? https://www.lifezette.com/polizette/hillarys-equal-pay-hypocrisy/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts