Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even though Jorge Ramos's daughter works for Hillary, and he is a known (D) supporter, he will pressure anyone regarding immigration.
In a recent interview, he asked Hillary a couple of questions, and she went into her rehearsed talking points.
However when she was pressed about using the term "illegal immigrants", she played to her audience and vowed not to use that term again.
[The newest PC approved speech to describe an illegal alien isn't even illegal immigrant anymore, it is undocumented immigrant. ]
Then when asked about her having supported building a wall, so what is the difference between her and Trump, she again went into her canned talking point. But to Ramos's credit, he pushed her and said that she said, that she wanted to build a wall. What does Hillary do, but come back with, no she only said a fence.
Lets assume that is true for a second. From Ramos and those who are for no borders perspective, that intellectually will not hold water because you are erecting a "structure" to prevent border crossing.
However from Hillary's view, she is trying to claim she didn't support a wall, just a fence.
As anyone with two functioning brain cells knows, even a tall wall can be scaled. However a fence is practically useless other than a visual deterrent. A good paid of shears will cut right through a fence, or it can be pulled up, knocked down, etc.
So are the (D's) who want to pander to Americans concerned with all sorts of illegals including terrorists coming into our country, just wanting something that is easy to take down?
Anyway, there is a video in the article link if you care to see her parse the truth for the 100th time.
Even though Jorge Ramos's daughter works for Hillary, and he is a known (D) supporter, he will pressure anyone regarding immigration.
In a recent interview, he asked Hillary a couple of questions, and she went into her rehearsed talking points.
However when she was pressed about using the term "illegal immigrants", she played to her audience and vowed not to use that term again.
[The newest PC approved speech to describe an illegal alien isn't even illegal immigrant anymore, it is undocumented immigrant. ]
Then when asked about her having supported building a wall, so what is the difference between her and Trump, she again went into her canned talking point. But to Ramos's credit, he pushed her and said that she said, that she wanted to build a wall. What does Hillary do, but come back with, no she only said a fence.
Lets assume that is true for a second. From Ramos and those who are for no borders perspective, that intellectually will not hold water because you are erecting a "structure" to prevent border crossing.
However from Hillary's view, she is trying to claim she didn't support a wall, just a fence.
As anyone with two functioning brain cells knows, even a tall wall can be scaled. However a fence is practically useless other than a visual deterrent. A good paid of shears will cut right through a fence, or it can be pulled up, knocked down, etc.
So are the (D's) who want to pander to Americans concerned with all sorts of illegals including terrorists coming into our country, just wanting something that is easy to take down?
Anyway, there is a video in the article link if you care to see her parse the truth for the 100th time.
Pathological liar does not even begin to cover someone like her.
`
She learned from her perjurer husband-in-name-only Bill. When he testisfied that he was "never alone with Monica", what he then said under cross-examination was that because there are other people somewhere in the White House, he was not alone with her.
Classic Hillary is she will tell an outright lie. When presented with proof that she did lie, she simply rephrases what she said without acknowledging the lie.
Classic Hillary is she will tell an outright lie. When presented with proof that she did lie, she simply rephrases what she said without acknowledging the lie.
She does this as easily as breathing air.
They seem to all do this, must be a training class to be a loyal Liberal. I don't even think Hillary knows what she believes. She does seem to have a love for money!
Let's face it, you guys will always hate Hillary.
Her supporters will always love Hillary.
That's not Hillary's problem though, it's moderates\independents like myself that have seen her for over 2 decades now and there is a reason why she's not well liked by those of us in the middle.
Keep in mind she finished THIRD in Iowa last year, that's a state that sees right through her "aw shucks pass me a corn dawg" attempts to woo voters. She's supported NAFTA offshoring, wall-street, wars, illegal immigration and a host of other things that she later corrects her position on depending upon what group she is standing in front of at the time.
In fairness, other presidents have done the same things but she doesn't have the charisma to pull it off.
Nothing new with this. Benghazi Hillary is a proven pathological liar, not just your run of the mill politician who will occasionally lie. She pretty much lies about EVERYTHING. To see how she stands on issues, you just have to see where the wind in blowing. She has no mind of her own except to further herself and will say and do anything to that end.
She learned from her perjurer husband-in-name-only Bill. When he testisfied that he was "never alone with Monica", what he then said under cross-examination was that because there are other people somewhere in the White House, he was not alone with her.
Watch the tapes of her interview with Bill on the couch when they were trying to dispel his bimbo eruptions rumors, all in an effort to deceive the American public so he could get elected. She knew very well about his infidelity, yet he was her ticket to being 1st Lady, so she lied for him going way back to the early 1990's.
Needless to say there is plenty of evidence that 60 Minutes is in the tank for the (D's), and even this interviewed, edited as it was, and you can see even Steve Croft does not buy into their false narrative.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathguy
Let's face it, you guys will always hate Hillary.
Her supporters will always love Hillary.
That's not Hillary's problem though, it's moderates\independents like myself that have seen her for over 2 decades now and there is a reason why she's not well liked by those of us in the middle.
Keep in mind she finished THIRD in Iowa last year, that's a state that sees right through her "aw shucks pass me a corn dawg" attempts to woo voters. She's supported NAFTA offshoring, wall-street, wars, illegal immigration and a host of other things that she later corrects her position on depending upon what group she is standing in front of at the time.
In fairness, other presidents have done the same things but she doesn't have the charisma to pull it off.
Quote:
Originally Posted by marino760
Nothing new with this. Benghazi Hillary is a proven pathological liar, not just your run of the mill politician who will occasionally lie. She pretty much lies about EVERYTHING. To see how she stands on issues, you just have to see where the wind in blowing. She has no mind of her own except to further herself and will say and do anything to that end.
We should never accept that all politicians lie, ergo Hillary is no better or worse. She is likely the worse in my memory, even worse than Obama. Sure many thing Obama said were lies, but he pretended to be something he was not, because he was a political newbie and unknown commodity. Hillary on the other hand has a political record dating back to when she was involved as a staffer during the Nixon impeachment hearings. Not to mention her being 1st Lady of Arkansas. Her flip flops make John Kerry look like a rank amateur.
Yet flip flops are bad enough, but flat out lies are something much different.
While there is little doubt politicians and their speech writers will tailor their speeches to a particular audience, those days are coming to an end. No longer (due to technology) will politicians be able to say they support ethanol subsidies to one audience, then turn around and say they are against it to another.
So not all politicians are flat out liars, and we have had honest (D & R) presidents in the WH before. Hillary on the other hand is likely the most dishonest candidate to run that I can remember. I'd suspect (though I don't know much about him) that Bernie Sanders is honest, because he seems to tell it like it is, and does not tailor his views to suit the audience or popularity of the issue.
If he beats Hillary for the (D) nomination, I doubt he will "pivot to the right", and will keep up with his liberal message.
Hillary on the other hand will do what she always has, and do or say anything to achieve power.
^
To think that anyone but the most hardened partisan koolaid drinker could vote for her after all the things we know, much less suspect or that has been covered, up is hard to believe.
The current email scandal is a perfect example, in that even if they only discover certain wrongdoing on her part, that is based on what she decided to turn over.
She and her minions had plenty of time to scrub anything damaging to the point of putting a stake through her heart with the admitted 30,000 email she said were destroyed.
Again we are going by what she told us, as hundreds of thousands of emails could have been erased for all we know.
`
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.