[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 151 of 279 « First‹ Previous 149  150  151  152  153 Next ›Last »
Topic LOCKED
Author Thread
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  5:52 PM    LAST EDITED: 10/28/2016  5:54 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
It confuses you because you need to read ulterior motives and complex thought process into a simple act of pasting a link. There's nothing Alt right about zero hedge, any more or less than WSJ.

Yeah, there is.

I don't subscribe to WSJ and I just happened on the article I linked to when browsing CNN at work. You could have found the article and posted it very easily if it was so important to you, but chose to respond with this crap instead.

It was not.

It was an OP/ED to an OP/ED (which is not behind a paywall). I assumed (I think fairly) that you were responding to the Zero Hedge characterization of the WSJ, which begins..."While the majority of the mainstream media is content to suckle at the teat of the Clinton/Establishment machine..."

My apologies if you found that as stupid as I did like anyone should.
AUTOADVERT
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
10/28/2016  6:01 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
It confuses you because you need to read ulterior motives and complex thought process into a simple act of pasting a link. There's nothing Alt right about zero hedge, any more or less than WSJ.

Yeah, there is.

I don't subscribe to WSJ and I just happened on the article I linked to when browsing CNN at work. You could have found the article and posted it very easily if it was so important to you, but chose to respond with this crap instead.

It was not.

It was an OP/ED to an OP/ED (which is not behind a paywall). I assumed (I think fairly) that you were responding to the Zero Hedge characterization of the WSJ, which begins..."While the majority of the mainstream media is content to suckle at the teat of the Clinton/Establishment machine..."

My apologies if you found that as stupid as I did like anyone should.

Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  6:23 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

I also say Breitbart is too.

I don't think it's just because I say so.

I suspect I don't possess that kind of power.

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I think you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article because you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article and not the right wing WSJ article.

Again, I think the embellishment being the purpose of the link is a fair assumption. If I posted a youtube clip of Lawrence O'Donnell playing and then commenting on a Bill O'Reilly clip, I'd assume people would understand I didn't expect them to ignore everything but the O'Reilly clip.
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
10/28/2016  6:28 PM    LAST EDITED: 10/28/2016  6:31 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

I also say Breitbart is too.

I don't think it's just because I say so.

I suspect I don't possess that kind of power.

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I think you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article because you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article and not the right wing WSJ article.

Again, I think the embellishment being the purpose of the link is a fair assumption. If I posted a youtube clip of Lawrence O'Donnell playing and then commenting on a Bill O'Reilly clip, I'd assume people would understand I didn't expect them to ignore everything but the O'Reilly clip.

I can link to anything I damn please. You can also create any type of fiction about me in your mind that you please. It's a free country. Suit yourself.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
GoNyGoNyGo
Posts: 23559
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/29/2003
Member: #411
USA
10/28/2016  6:52 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:What stop putting words in my mouth and assuming. I am getting tired of it.

I've been very patient with your lying.


LOL- there you go again. Go ahead point 'em out !

You are so tolerant. Thanks for letting me play with you....it really is special.

(now, that was smug)
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  6:53 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

I also say Breitbart is too.

I don't think it's just because I say so.

I suspect I don't possess that kind of power.

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I think you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article because you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article and not the right wing WSJ article.

Again, I think the embellishment being the purpose of the link is a fair assumption. If I posted a youtube clip of Lawrence O'Donnell playing and then commenting on a Bill O'Reilly clip, I'd assume people would understand I didn't expect them to ignore everything but the O'Reilly clip.

I can link to anything I damn please.

I never suggested otherwise.
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  6:54 PM
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
GoNyGoNyGo wrote:What stop putting words in my mouth and assuming. I am getting tired of it.

I've been very patient with your lying.


LOL- there you go again. Go ahead point 'em out !

You are so tolerant. Thanks for letting me play with you....it really is special.

(now, that was smug)

Man, you guys quite enjoy your personal battles.
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
10/28/2016  7:29 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

I also say Breitbart is too.

I don't think it's just because I say so.

I suspect I don't possess that kind of power.

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I think you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article because you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article and not the right wing WSJ article.

Again, I think the embellishment being the purpose of the link is a fair assumption. If I posted a youtube clip of Lawrence O'Donnell playing and then commenting on a Bill O'Reilly clip, I'd assume people would understand I didn't expect them to ignore everything but the O'Reilly clip.

I can link to anything I damn please.

I never suggested otherwise.

Well yes you did, your post suggested I need to justify my thought process of sharing an article on a message board to a pompous prick.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/28/2016  7:33 PM
The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
10/28/2016  7:38 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

If the balance of power shifts because of this it will be a tragedy but a well deserved one.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/28/2016  7:48 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

If the balance of power shifts because of this it will be a tragedy but a well deserved one.


With the SC, it would shift the country for 20 or 30 years at least.
meloshouldgo
Posts: 26565
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 5/3/2014
Member: #5801
10/28/2016  7:54 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

If the balance of power shifts because of this it will be a tragedy but a well deserved one.


With the SC, it would shift the country for 20 or 30 years at least.

The way to control that is through the Senate. Trump really is a wild card he is completely unpredictable, I can't even begin to project what he will do. I suspect neither can he. I said several pages back the Senate race is more important. And Democrats need to capitalize on the anti GOP malaise to win it back.

I cannot teach anybody anything. I can only try to make them think - Socrates
nixluva
Posts: 56258
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 10/5/2004
Member: #758
USA
10/28/2016  8:51 PM
If you really look at all of the information that has been released and exposed regarding Hillary Clinton from Benghazi, the early Clinton scandals from the 80's, including what they may find on Weiner's laptop and John Podesta's stolen emails, it all combines to give people the MOST deep look into a Presidential Candidate in the History of this country. We've never known this much about a Presidential Candidate. We simply have NEVER known more about someone than we have about Hillary Clinton.

The following month, the House Select Committee on Benghazi requested access to Clinton's emails regarding the 2012 attack in Benghazi. Clinton provided 300 emails. An additional set of emails, produced from other officials' email accounts, had been provided to the committee in August 2014 by the State Department.[1] On December 5, 2014, Clinton released 30,490 printed emails to the State Department. Another 31,830 emails were determined to be private and not released.[1]

Clinton also noted that majority of the emails she sent were delivered to government employees with government addresses. Such messages were captured on the State Department system. She also provided the State Department with 55,000 pages' worth of emails per their request after she left office as secretary of state, but she retained personal emails unrelated to State Department business. Clinton also claimed she requested that the State Department make these emails available to the public.[43]
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  8:51 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

So you're changing your vote then?
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  8:56 PM    LAST EDITED: 10/28/2016  9:19 PM
meloshouldgo wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
meloshouldgo wrote:Yeah there is - because you said so. Got it

I also say Breitbart is too.

I don't think it's just because I say so.

I suspect I don't possess that kind of power.

No you didn't assume fairly, you paint a picture about people in your mind based on your own lack of reading comprehension, You take things out of context, draw conclusions about people based on your very limited stereotyped thinking and the put words in people's mouth to complete your spin. Then you cling to anything that validates that POV no matter how tenuous the connection. Only you can think a WSJ article would require a right wing rendition.

I think you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article because you linked to an alt right rendition of a WSJ article and not the right wing WSJ article.

Again, I think the embellishment being the purpose of the link is a fair assumption. If I posted a youtube clip of Lawrence O'Donnell playing and then commenting on a Bill O'Reilly clip, I'd assume people would understand I didn't expect them to ignore everything but the O'Reilly clip.

I can link to anything I damn please.

I never suggested otherwise.

Well yes you did, your post suggested I need to justify my thought process of sharing an article on a message board to a pompous prick.

I asked why'd you just didn't link to the original article.

Any other meaning is your own imagination.

Why would you conflate a critique of something with an argument about your right to do it?

If I critique a game by porzingis do you take that to mean I think he had no right to play in it?

Tell ya what, I'll assume you observe my right to be a pompous prick, and you can assume I observe your right to do what the hell you like.

We good?
Bonn1997
Posts: 58654
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 2/2/2004
Member: #581
USA
10/28/2016  9:18 PM
Knickoftime wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

So you're changing your vote then?


No, not at all. The way Republican Comey handled this is inappropriate in my opinion. I gave Hillary a donation as soon as this news came out.
Knickoftime
Posts: 24159
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2011
Member: #3370
10/28/2016  9:24 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

So you're changing your vote then?


No, not at all. The way Republican Comey handled this is inappropriate in my opinion. I gave Hillary a donation as soon as this news came out.

Then assume the majority of the electorate aren't that sway-able either.

Watch 538, it'll tell you what's actually happening.

Good a place as any to start.

https://twitter.com/NateSilver538?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Don't spend the next 11 days worrying.

Trump is still Trump.
reub
Posts: 21836
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2016
Member: #6227
10/28/2016  9:56 PM
Bonn1997 wrote:
Knickoftime wrote:
Bonn1997 wrote:The media is really dramatizing this. It's bad. I'm wondering where the polls will be in like 5 days. I have no idea how bad it is but I wouldn't be shocked if Trump ends up ahead of Clinton.

So you're changing your vote then?


No, not at all. The way Republican Comey handled this is inappropriate in my opinion. I gave Hillary a donation as soon as this news came out.

Funny, Democrats were in love with Comey just yesterday!
reub
Posts: 21836
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2016
Member: #6227
10/28/2016  9:56 PM
"DICKILEAKS"
reub
Posts: 21836
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2016
Member: #6227
10/28/2016  9:57 PM
"The Cocktober Surprise"
Page 151 of 279 « First‹ Previous 149  150  151  152  153 Next ›Last »
Topic LOCKED
Where the heck is Hillary Clinton?
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy