GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Her speeches to Wall Street at $200K per were about public service? Selling our Uranium to Russia so they can sell it to Iran was in our public interest? Getting millions from the Saudi royal family was in the public's interests?

I don't know if any candidate has not said those things nor did I suggest that but I do know that when Pence says it you can believe him as he lives that life.

That isn't a response to what I wrote.

Can you acknowledge, not admire, but just at least acknowledge the woman Hillary Clinton has a biography of public service going back to her high school years (for Republican causes, btw)? Do you have any knowledge of her years at Yale or her early years in Arkansas?

Clinton is an highly imperfect candidate and yeah, a less imperfect candidate would be ideal. But this caricature of her is overblown.

She is a serious person and a serious intellect who has a track record of genuine concern about the welfare of children, and the poor and disadvantaged and public policy.

One may disagree with federally mandated or controlled universal healthcare (the issue that put her on the GOP map for scorn) but can anyone really question the intent, despite the philosophical divide on application?

I GET people hate her. I GET people's real concerns about her. I don't get why she needs to be a caricature.

Hyperbole is almost universally a sign of a lack of knowledge and/or conviction.

Honestly I do NOT know of her time before 1992. I will need to read up on it.

Judging what I see over the last 20+ years, she is repugnant to me.

I truly believe that with the pattern of corruption that seems to follow her, that she is not someone I could ever support. Bill is likable, she is not. I do not believe her intentions are for anyone's benefit but her own.

As I said before, I don't love either candidate. Judging from some of the posts here some of us may be better candidates.

As for being a caricature, were you equally worried about GWB being so maligned and mistreated and made a caricature of? I only say that because it happens both ways and to be fair we need to acknowledge it.

However I 100% believe Trump also fits into that bold, that's also not really up for debate. I don't even really think regardless of what party you pledge your allegence to that that can be denied. Everything about Trump is first and foremost about Trump. Now if you take those two as equals, which candidate is better? Who's self serving agenda takes this country to dark place and who's doesn't have much impact at all?

Trump is an admitted FAN of Putin. A KGB leftover who kills those in his way. I mean he's paid compliments to NKorea's Kim. Some of the things Trump has said that have been glossed over are mind numbingly scary. In this case Hillary being a career politician who probably does little but cater to voters and tow the party line is a HUGE positive.

meloanyk wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:Meanwhile in Dwayne Wade's old town and still prehistoric raptor Bosh's current town...

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480

Yeah...saw this. F'n unbelievable. I just don't understand the mindset of some people.

That image of him on the ground with his hands up before being shot is going to be all over the nation and world.

CashMoney...where are you. You're an officer...what would you do in that situation?

I was the Head Dean in my HS for a number of years, and I worked with cops all the time, and considered some my friends. I am not anti-police, and always point out that I wouldn't want to be living in a society without them, BUT this is simply getting out of hand.

This story is insane. You would think officers would err on the side of NOT shooting a guy with hands up and back on the ground, Yes even with cops being attacked the last 2 weeks. This is incredible. The officer should lose his gun and be suspended and re-trained.

This is nuts!! I can't fathom this at all. I have never owned a rifle or gun so excuse the naivety of my question.

If I'm still and pointing a rifle with my finger on the trigger, is it possible that the trigger is so sensitive that it might fire with slightest shake or movement of my finger or does one as Ive always assumed have to apply some force to pull it back to fire ??

Not looking to make any excuse , I just can't fathom how this man was lying there for awhile and then belatedly gets shot in the leg

Crazy

This what the shooting of police officers will do.
If you think they all are macho you are mistaken.
A lot of them are regular folks with their own psycho issues and fears.
And now some of them scared to death.
You do not want 600K people with a guns to be scared to death.
They are facing very unusual situations all the time and it is just a matter of time before they will pull the trigger.
The only way to prevent it is to disarm regular police officers as some countries did.
But in US this will make a lot of areas a no go war zones and create internal refuges problems.
Solution which makes things worth is not a solution.

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:Meanwhile in Dwayne Wade's old town and still prehistoric raptor Bosh's current town...

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480

Yeah...saw this. F'n unbelievable. I just don't understand the mindset of some people.

That image of him on the ground with his hands up before being shot is going to be all over the nation and world.

CashMoney...where are you. You're an officer...what would you do in that situation?

I was the Head Dean in my HS for a number of years, and I worked with cops all the time, and considered some my friends. I am not anti-police, and always point out that I wouldn't want to be living in a society without them, BUT this is simply getting out of hand.

This story is insane. You would think officers would err on the side of NOT shooting a guy with hands up and back on the ground, Yes even with cops being attacked the last 2 weeks. This is incredible. The officer should lose his gun and be suspended and re-trained.

Suspended and Re-trained? This should be an action you should be simply fired for. This is equivalent to a test driver for an truck manufacturer running over any people walking on the street and the truck manufacturer suspending and re-training the driver after that. Do you see that happening?

Re-trained to desk duty.

nah probably just safer to just fire him and let him try to find a desk job on his own.

gunsnewing wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Public service like this?
and then laugh about it

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gEJQf0DDZxc

Appears that military trops dont want either candidate but this is what strikes me. They did a poll of military troops, they were highly dissatisfied with either as Commander In Chief but their dissatisfaction with Hillary as President was 82% . Anyway 50% said they would reluctantly vote for to Trump, 23% for a third party and 20% to Hillary. I would imagine that any law enforcement would go along the same lines.

How can you be Commander In Chief when a staggering 82% say they are not dissatisfied with you after her long experience in key roles?

If I'm her advisor, Im telling her to select an Admiral for VP because that is her achilles heel

gunsnewing wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Public service like this?
and then laugh about it

A perfect example of anecdotal anti-intellectualism.

fishmike wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Her speeches to Wall Street at $200K per were about public service? Selling our Uranium to Russia so they can sell it to Iran was in our public interest? Getting millions from the Saudi royal family was in the public's interests?

I don't know if any candidate has not said those things nor did I suggest that but I do know that when Pence says it you can believe him as he lives that life.

That isn't a response to what I wrote.

Can you acknowledge, not admire, but just at least acknowledge the woman Hillary Clinton has a biography of public service going back to her high school years (for Republican causes, btw)? Do you have any knowledge of her years at Yale or her early years in Arkansas?

Clinton is an highly imperfect candidate and yeah, a less imperfect candidate would be ideal. But this caricature of her is overblown.

She is a serious person and a serious intellect who has a track record of genuine concern about the welfare of children, and the poor and disadvantaged and public policy.

One may disagree with federally mandated or controlled universal healthcare (the issue that put her on the GOP map for scorn) but can anyone really question the intent, despite the philosophical divide on application?

I GET people hate her. I GET people's real concerns about her. I don't get why she needs to be a caricature.

Hyperbole is almost universally a sign of a lack of knowledge and/or conviction.

Honestly I do NOT know of her time before 1992. I will need to read up on it.

Judging what I see over the last 20+ years, she is repugnant to me.

I truly believe that with the pattern of corruption that seems to follow her, that she is not someone I could ever support. Bill is likable, she is not. I do not believe her intentions are for anyone's benefit but her own.

As I said before, I don't love either candidate. Judging from some of the posts here some of us may be better candidates.

As for being a caricature, were you equally worried about GWB being so maligned and mistreated and made a caricature of? I only say that because it happens both ways and to be fair we need to acknowledge it.

I 100% agree with your bold. I really really dislike her. Its really hard to stomach the "life of service to the people" argument when you consider just what that lifestyle entails. When you consider the lifestyle that her public service has provided, along with the bank that argument is a real non starter.

However I 100% believe Trump also fits into that bold, that's also not really up for debate. I don't even really think regardless of what party you pledge your allegence to that that can be denied. Everything about Trump is first and foremost about Trump. Now if you take those two as equals, which candidate is better? Who's self serving agenda takes this country to dark place and who's doesn't have much impact at all?

Trump is an admitted FAN of Putin. A KGB leftover who kills those in his way. I mean he's paid compliments to NKorea's Kim. Some of the things Trump has said that have been glossed over are mind numbingly scary. In this case Hillary being a career politician who probably does little but cater to voters and tow the party line is a HUGE positive.

I get what you are saying here. I really am terrified of Trump's respect for Putin or whatever it is. IT is not good. Putin is bad news. At the same time, it was this administration and HRC that has done the "reset" with Russia and the Uranium deal. Let's not forget BO speaking the Medvedev thinking he is off tape and he says something to the effect of, after the next election, I will have more leeway to do what is needed. Was he referring to the Uranium deal then? Lack of support to Ukraine and other Baltic states struggling to get out from under Putin's thumb?

I can understand you thinking she could be a better custodian of things because of her experience. THe problem is, many don't like where things are now and want some change. I don't like career politicians. She is a prime example of one. He may be nuts, but he is not a politician.

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:Meanwhile in Dwayne Wade's old town and still prehistoric raptor Bosh's current town...

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480

Yeah...saw this. F'n unbelievable. I just don't understand the mindset of some people.

That image of him on the ground with his hands up before being shot is going to be all over the nation and world.

CashMoney...where are you. You're an officer...what would you do in that situation?

I was the Head Dean in my HS for a number of years, and I worked with cops all the time, and considered some my friends. I am not anti-police, and always point out that I wouldn't want to be living in a society without them, BUT this is simply getting out of hand.

This story is insane. You would think officers would err on the side of NOT shooting a guy with hands up and back on the ground, Yes even with cops being attacked the last 2 weeks. This is incredible. The officer should lose his gun and be suspended and re-trained.

But when people protest the police for such actions, they get shouted down as an attack on the police..Over 100 unarmed African Americans were killed by police last year..With almost no repercussion..I think one officer out of 100 had to spend a year in jail on weekends...

gunsnewing wrote:

fishmike wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Her speeches to Wall Street at $200K per were about public service? Selling our Uranium to Russia so they can sell it to Iran was in our public interest? Getting millions from the Saudi royal family was in the public's interests?

I don't know if any candidate has not said those things nor did I suggest that but I do know that when Pence says it you can believe him as he lives that life.

That isn't a response to what I wrote.

Can you acknowledge, not admire, but just at least acknowledge the woman Hillary Clinton has a biography of public service going back to her high school years (for Republican causes, btw)? Do you have any knowledge of her years at Yale or her early years in Arkansas?

Clinton is an highly imperfect candidate and yeah, a less imperfect candidate would be ideal. But this caricature of her is overblown.

She is a serious person and a serious intellect who has a track record of genuine concern about the welfare of children, and the poor and disadvantaged and public policy.

One may disagree with federally mandated or controlled universal healthcare (the issue that put her on the GOP map for scorn) but can anyone really question the intent, despite the philosophical divide on application?

I GET people hate her. I GET people's real concerns about her. I don't get why she needs to be a caricature.

Hyperbole is almost universally a sign of a lack of knowledge and/or conviction.

Honestly I do NOT know of her time before 1992. I will need to read up on it.

Judging what I see over the last 20+ years, she is repugnant to me.

I truly believe that with the pattern of corruption that seems to follow her, that she is not someone I could ever support. Bill is likable, she is not. I do not believe her intentions are for anyone's benefit but her own.

As I said before, I don't love either candidate. Judging from some of the posts here some of us may be better candidates.

As for being a caricature, were you equally worried about GWB being so maligned and mistreated and made a caricature of? I only say that because it happens both ways and to be fair we need to acknowledge it.

I 100% agree with your bold. I really really dislike her. Its really hard to stomach the "life of service to the people" argument when you consider just what that lifestyle entails. When you consider the lifestyle that her public service has provided, along with the bank that argument is a real non starter.

However I 100% believe Trump also fits into that bold, that's also not really up for debate. I don't even really think regardless of what party you pledge your allegence to that that can be denied. Everything about Trump is first and foremost about Trump. Now if you take those two as equals, which candidate is better? Who's self serving agenda takes this country to dark place and who's doesn't have much impact at all?

Trump is an admitted FAN of Putin. A KGB leftover who kills those in his way. I mean he's paid compliments to NKorea's Kim. Some of the things Trump has said that have been glossed over are mind numbingly scary. In this case Hillary being a career politician who probably does little but cater to voters and tow the party line is a HUGE positive.

Maybe Trump can help make those who are still on the fence feel safer tonight with his speech

But if he has no real script, or goes off it substantially, you'll see the real Trump…the guy that will scare most rational independent/undecided voters.

So which Trump will you see- the scripted Trump or the scary Trump? Either way he has some problems because he's painted a certain picture of himself up to this point, and in some ways he is penned in by the Trump persona he has created?

holfresh wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

WaltLongmire wrote:

Cartman718 wrote:Meanwhile in Dwayne Wade's old town and still prehistoric raptor Bosh's current town...

Tweet was deleted or there was problem with the URL:

https://twitter.com/wsvn/status/755896679476244480

Yeah...saw this. F'n unbelievable. I just don't understand the mindset of some people.

That image of him on the ground with his hands up before being shot is going to be all over the nation and world.

CashMoney...where are you. You're an officer...what would you do in that situation?

I was the Head Dean in my HS for a number of years, and I worked with cops all the time, and considered some my friends. I am not anti-police, and always point out that I wouldn't want to be living in a society without them, BUT this is simply getting out of hand.

This story is insane. You would think officers would err on the side of NOT shooting a guy with hands up and back on the ground, Yes even with cops being attacked the last 2 weeks. This is incredible. The officer should lose his gun and be suspended and re-trained.

But when people protest the police for such actions, they get shouted down as an attack on the police..Over 100 unarmed African Americans were killed by police last year..With almost no repercussion..I think one officer out of 100 had to spend a year in jail on weekends...

This incident hurts all the good police out there and fuels a justifiable negativity toward law enforcement.

WNBA fines 3 teams and players over black warmup jerseys

Three WNBA teams and their players have been fined by the league for wearing plain, black T-shirts before games in response to recent national events.

The New York Liberty, Phoenix Mercury and Indiana Fever were docked $5,000, and their players have to pay $500 each after wearing the shirts during warmups despite a league memo earlier this week reminding teams that uniforms are not to be altered in any way.

“We are proud of WNBA players' engagement and passionate advocacy for non-violent solutions to difficult social issues but expect them to comply with the league’s uniform guidelines,” WNBA President Lisa Borders said in a statement Wednesday night.

New York was one of three WNBA teams — along with the Minnesota Lynx and Dallas Wings — to wear warmup shirts in remembrance of two African American men shot by police and five Dallas police officers shot by a sniper earlier this month.

It's really disappointing the league isn't having our back on this one.

— Indiana's Briann January

Liberty players have worn all black warmup shirts featuring only the logo of league sponsor Adidas four times. After the fines were announced Wednesday, Liberty center Kiah Stokes tweeted, “It's just unfortunate because we tried to compromise by wearing an adidas shirt, but it obviously didn’t matter.”

Indiana point guard Briann January said: “What's most upsetting is the way it was handled. You have a league that is 90 — if not above 90% African American — and you have an issue that is directly affecting them and the people they know, and you have a league that isn’t willing to side with them.”

Phoenix forward Mistie Bass tweeted: “Don’t say we have a voice and then fine us because we use it. #notpuppets #cutthestrings.”

After the June shootings at an Orlando gay nightclub, the WNBA issued shirts for players to wear to show their support for the victims. Some have wondered why the same didn’t happen after the more recent shootings.

“When the thing in Orlando happened the league saw the NBA backed it and we went all in. Nobody had any question,” January said. “They knew it was a right or wrong issue. This is a very similar thing. It's really disappointing the league isn't having our back on this one.”

Fever teammate and president of the players’ union Tamika Catchings said: “Instead of the league taking a stance with us, where they tell us they appreciate our expressing our concerns like they did for Orlando, we're fighting against each other.”

Phoenix forward/center Kelsey Bone wrote in a series of tweets: “When the shooting in Orlando happened the WNBA immediately sent shirts for us to wear to show support.. As a league with Players and fans a part of the LGBT community that’s exactly what should have been done… As players we have been trying to figure out where were the shirts to support the events going on in our country recently… We were told a statement had been made and that was that… So some teams decided to take matters in their own hands.

“I think it’s sick that we are being punished for supporting a matter that affects majority of us personally… Why support one cause that effects our country and not another?”/quote]

WaltLongmire wrote:

gunsnewing wrote:

fishmike wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:

Knickoftime wrote:

GoNyGoNyGo wrote:With all Hillary has shown about herself, what do you see?

A person whose ambitions have led to questionable choices.

But I also see a person who dedicated her life to public service and to worthy causes a decades before being a senator from NY or Secretary of State or President was an obtainable goal.

Of the two candidates, I see someone whose biography is about actual public service.

To suggest the choices she made in her life have all been a grand scheme to be President is ludicrous.

IMO. Pence was great. IF showing you are a family person who believes in God and Country is "regressive" then so be it.

Exactly which President or VP candidate has NOT done that in their first convention speech?

Her speeches to Wall Street at $200K per were about public service? Selling our Uranium to Russia so they can sell it to Iran was in our public interest? Getting millions from the Saudi royal family was in the public's interests?

I don't know if any candidate has not said those things nor did I suggest that but I do know that when Pence says it you can believe him as he lives that life.

That isn't a response to what I wrote.

Can you acknowledge, not admire, but just at least acknowledge the woman Hillary Clinton has a biography of public service going back to her high school years (for Republican causes, btw)? Do you have any knowledge of her years at Yale or her early years in Arkansas?

Clinton is an highly imperfect candidate and yeah, a less imperfect candidate would be ideal. But this caricature of her is overblown.

She is a serious person and a serious intellect who has a track record of genuine concern about the welfare of children, and the poor and disadvantaged and public policy.

One may disagree with federally mandated or controlled universal healthcare (the issue that put her on the GOP map for scorn) but can anyone really question the intent, despite the philosophical divide on application?

I GET people hate her. I GET people's real concerns about her. I don't get why she needs to be a caricature.

Hyperbole is almost universally a sign of a lack of knowledge and/or conviction.

Honestly I do NOT know of her time before 1992. I will need to read up on it.

Judging what I see over the last 20+ years, she is repugnant to me.

I truly believe that with the pattern of corruption that seems to follow her, that she is not someone I could ever support. Bill is likable, she is not. I do not believe her intentions are for anyone's benefit but her own.

As I said before, I don't love either candidate. Judging from some of the posts here some of us may be better candidates.

As for being a caricature, were you equally worried about GWB being so maligned and mistreated and made a caricature of? I only say that because it happens both ways and to be fair we need to acknowledge it.

I 100% agree with your bold. I really really dislike her. Its really hard to stomach the "life of service to the people" argument when you consider just what that lifestyle entails. When you consider the lifestyle that her public service has provided, along with the bank that argument is a real non starter.

However I 100% believe Trump also fits into that bold, that's also not really up for debate. I don't even really think regardless of what party you pledge your allegence to that that can be denied. Everything about Trump is first and foremost about Trump. Now if you take those two as equals, which candidate is better? Who's self serving agenda takes this country to dark place and who's doesn't have much impact at all?

Trump is an admitted FAN of Putin. A KGB leftover who kills those in his way. I mean he's paid compliments to NKorea's Kim. Some of the things Trump has said that have been glossed over are mind numbingly scary. In this case Hillary being a career politician who probably does little but cater to voters and tow the party line is a HUGE positive.

Maybe Trump can help make those who are still on the fence feel safer tonight with his speech

His problem is that if he gives a teleprompter speech written by professionals, it will be obvious that he is being handled and is not himself,

But if he has no real script, or goes off it substantially, you'll see the real Trump…the guy that will scare most rational independent/undecided voters.

So which Trump will you see- the scripted Trump or the scary Trump? Either way he has some problems because he's painted a certain picture of himself up to this point, and in some ways he is penned in by the Trump persona he has created?

No different than Hillary or any other previous Presidents and candidates