General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThe bizzarro world of a 3-time married Man going after a one time married woman--about her marriage.
This discussion thread was locked as off-topic by mcar (a host of the General Discussion forum).
And that one time married Woman has been married for over 40 years.
Personally I find it a thousand times more admirable to stick it out hiccups and all---than to call it quits--- 2 F'ing times.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)and would much rather call it quits than continue to be humiliated within my circle of friends
Democat
(11,617 posts)If so, please leave DU now.
Duppers
(28,120 posts)Where? All I read was a personal preference.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)I don't get involved in other people's marriage
maxsolomon
(33,327 posts)would you behave as Trump behaves? no, you wouldn't.
it's pretty obvious.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)That's odd.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)me before I entered a room and I would hear the sshhh ssshh here she comes. One got drunk one night and told me stories about my EX
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)Maybe my last marriage was strange but neither my husband or I considered sexual fidelity a deal breaker in our marriage. We didn't have an open marriage but we loved each other and recognized people can have fleeting attractions to other people. It wasn't something we talked about much but as far as my friends having any input into my marriage, I did tell a few of them they didn't have to be concerned. My husband and I had our own lives while we loved each other.
yellowcanine
(35,699 posts)AtheistCrusader
(33,982 posts)pnwmom
(108,977 posts)but no one including Hillary should be blamed for their spouse's transgressions.
moonbabygo
(281 posts)is between him and Hillary. I felt very bad for her and Chelsea the day they walked off the plane (after the monica thing) and Bill was walking behind them. I did feel empathy for her
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)LynneSin
(95,337 posts)However NONE of them would attack another person for surviving a 40 year marriage despite the very public issues.
And to be honest, Trump is a serial monogamist. If he's not elected president I expect him to be trading in the current wife in a few years. He likes his wives young and stunning looking. Once they get into their 40's he starts his cycle of cheating and finding the next Mrs. Trump. And because he is rich, young women will put up with that. And because the woman is stunning they might be able to land him.
WhiteTara
(29,705 posts)it's cheating and getting divorced and cheating on the next wife.
LynneSin
(95,337 posts)My friend got caught up with a guy like that. He would be in blissful love for years and sometimes after 2-3 years he'd be bored and move on to the next wife. Yes he was a cheater but the person he was cheating on was eventually the next wife. This guy had no clue how to just be single.
If my friend stuck it out she would have been wife #3, but after 3 years of dating (he was separated at the time), she found that he was getting bored with her and found out he already moved on to the next partner.
leftofcool
(19,460 posts)marble falls
(57,080 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)There are other sites they can go to. This place is not a place for people who want to lick Trump's heels. He's their nominee - we get to tear into him now.
Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)it should be rejected, out of hand, universally.
But, THIS is America post the 1994 "Republican Revolution."
SO, whatever bullshit they spew, no matter how ridiculous, is indulged.
JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)Then he gets a free pass.
All you have to do is praise jesus, say you are saved, be a Republican - and anything and everything you do is forgiven.
Cosmocat
(14,564 posts)That is it in a nutshell.
Damn good gig being a "conservative."
JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)If only I could find things like blanket training acceptable. Oh - and if I though I could just say I'm 'saved' and my husband would forgive me for stepping outside of my marriage. And well - if I believed that only I - ME - the only person that matters - should get 'stuff from the government' while denying those who truly are in need the benefit of living in a country where we give each other a hand when they need it.
It's just not fair you know?
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)What a racket.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)Double R Superstar!
I'm sorry - what were you saying? I'm still stuck on the smile!
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)Cornell West.
JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)It must have been that time Ivana skied backwards down a hill wagging her finger at him because he booked his future ex wife at the same ski resort . . . while he was still married.
That must have rattle his brain a bit and left him in permanent jerk mode.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)26 times with a CONVICTED PEDOPHILE.
I am fairly confident that is going to be coming up as a discussion point if it hasn't already been broached yet.
And then there is the fact her husband was impeached for lying under oath.
Of course, there are naked pictures of Trump's current wife available on the Internet.
These two are some of the Worst Candidates Ever.
Arkansas Granny
(31,515 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)I realize many people are comfortable with them, but I am not.
I am surprised the man was convicted. Usually there are no consequences, especially for the rich and privileged.
Democat
(11,617 posts)You yourself are traveling on the same internet with pedophiles.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)We actually ended a friendship with a man my husband grew up with who was convicted of criminal sexual acts with his 13 year old step-daughter. And I can tell the difference between "people using the inter tubes" versus "26 times on a plane with a pedophile and his young victims while on our way to a private island to vacation".
Bill has done some pretty skanky things in his life, but I have no idea what he was thinking with this one.
ON EDIT: I am not saying Bill participated - I am saying "hanging with a man who was convicted of pedophilia whose victims say they met Bill Clinton."
Lady_Chat
(561 posts)Using your logic, your husband was friends with a pedophile. Perhaps people on the outside would think he "might have known" or "maybe he also participated". They might also think he terminated the friendship, to save his own skin. People can think a lot of things, and they don't necessarily have to be true.
You might bring this up, but Trump never will, since he was also friends with Epstein. But here is the difference...there is a million dollar suit being brought by two women, who claim, as teenagers they were forced to "serve" Trump. Trump denies it, but the accusation is still there, so we'll see what happens. One of the reasons he is bringing up Bill's sex life, is to distract from his own, try and bolster his abysmal ratings with women, and avoid talking about real issues.
Hillary Clinton has never been accused of being unfaithful or of being a pedophile, and she's the one running for president. It's her marriage, if she loves him enough to forgive him, that's her business. That's why seeing the news about Ken Starr today, is so righteous and amusing. I hope it reminds people of what a useless witch hunt that was. If anyone hurt Monica Lewinsky, it was his expensive and ridiculous "investigation" about what went on between two consenting adults. Not "morality" but politics.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)But I will stick to just one:
Is there any evidence that Bernie Sanders or his immediate family were ever on the Lolita express? What about Joe Biden? Elizabeth Warren? Or any of a dozen other qualify Democrats? If the answer is no, then why is Hillary running?
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)Howsabout Ted Cruz?
What's your point?
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)She already lied to the American public REPEATEDLY, even creating a "vast right wing conspiracy" because she was either a) stupidly believing his lies or b) covering for him.
The fact we already KNOW that she goes into denial/rejection mode and has epic levels of pride involved actually scares me because she isn't a person with integrity who will say "look, I'm good with him screwing around - it's embarrassing, but that's how we run our marriage" or even "he's lied for the last time and I've dumped him.' She protects her image above all else.
And I have no idea where Ted Cruz came from - I was making a list of Democrats who don't appear to have ethical problems/haven't been vacationing with a convicted pedophile.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)The "blackmail" angle is straight out of the House Judiciary impeachment panel playbook. It was silly then, and it's ridiculous now.
BTW, yes there was a vast right wing conspiracy working to undermine many Democrats, including the Clintons. There's a ton of empirical evidence about it. It still exists today and is, sadly, aided and abetted by a tiny left wing cabal. On this very thread, in fact.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)at this point, the only "evidence" about it came from a guy with a book to sell who currently works for the Hillary team. I even bought the book: "Blinded by the Right" by David Brock -- the story of a gay man who helped play media games for the right, smeared Anita Hill and is now trying to do it with Bernie Sanders because he just loves the Hillary team now.
We now know how social media works and David Brock laid it out: one side does a "some sources say" story, and the rest jump on the bandwagon without verifying diddly until chairs are being thrown and zombie hordes are stampeding the podium (because people sitting down are yelling at them while the people on the platform play deaf). That isn't "vast right wing conspiracy" -- that's MARKETING. And when actual reporters did their jobs it turned out there was some fire with all that smoke. The allegations that Bill Clinton was a cheating dog of a husband were apparently common knowledge all over Arkansas, his long term mistress came forward with taped phone calls between them, and one hotel employee sued him for dropping his pants in front of her. But the rest of us were convinced it was just lies because Bill and Hillary went on national television and lied about it.
So we believed they were victims. Articles were written about how the mistress probably faked the tapes, and Hillary simpered at us about how "mentally ill women were always having imaginary relationships with her husband". None of us wanted to believe it until the people who were being gas lighted got a blue dress with Bill DNA and a college intern was caught being stupid on tape.
But the damage done is still in place TWENTY YEARS LATER. Instead of "loyal opposition" treated with respect, with a clear understanding of the obligations of a two party system where both sides work to keep the other side honest, we have epic level partisan divide and echo chamber mentality.
They didn't impeach Bush Junior and he LIED US INTO WAR. They haven't impeached President Obama, and he is BLACK and SMART (and we all know they HATE that). Bill Clinton embarrassed the hell out of this country not just by being a hound dog, but being arrogant about lying about it.
And one more thing: if Hillary is someone we can't believe a word the Opposition says about (because they hate her), that pretty much disqualifies her because it takes away the "check and balance" and means no one will believe when/if she is caught behaving inappropriately (which is what is going down with this email stuff).
That's my take. Your mileage may vary.
OilemFirchen
(7,143 posts)IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Also see:
Hard Choices $18.00
My Life $35.00
Clinton Cash: The Untold Story of How and Why Foreign Governments and Businesses Helped Make Bill and Hillary $27.99
The Clintons' War on Women $27.99
Alter Egos: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and the Twilight Struggle Over American Power $28.00
and over THIRTY SIX THOUSAND other books that pop up when you put "Clinton" into an Amazon search. Obama only gets you a measly EIGHTEEN THOUSAND while "George Bush" gets you another Thirty-Six thousand, including two supposedly written by that illiterate clown.
Like I said, MARKETING.
JustAnotherGen
(31,818 posts)And take half of everything.
Then he can't sully her name anymore.
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)When did this happen?
Divernan
(15,480 posts)It doesn't matter how much billionaire Clinton buddy, Epstein, was paying the girls for their sexual services. It doesn't matter that Bill was not paying them himself. If Bill used their services, it was statutory rape and pedophilia.
Democat
(11,617 posts)You are on the internet.
Therefore, using your logic, you may be guilty.
WhiteTara
(29,705 posts)gwheezie
(3,580 posts)When is he going to be arrested?
Divernan
(15,480 posts)Clinton cut his ties with billionaire pedophile Epstein 10 years ago.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)a supposed Democrat trashing Bill for Epstein leaves out the friendship and kind words donnie has for the same man:
https://news.vice.com/article/the-salacious-ammo-even-donald-trump-wont-use-in-a-fight-against-hillary-clinton-bill-clinton
But according to someone with intimate knowledge of the situation, Trump and Epstein appeared to have a somewhat stronger connection.
"I've known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy,'' Trump told New York magazine in a 2002 profile of Epstein written three years before Epstein began to be investigated. "He's a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side. No doubt about it Jeffrey enjoys his social life."
Perhaps you're too young to remember how Bill's ratings WENT UP during and after the impeachment you're puking over. Also interesting for a supposed liberal.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)I was convinced he was being unjustly attacked. With the benefit of hindsight, I am more ashamed of the power differential and how Monica was treated.
And that is a disgusting quote from Trump, too.
Sounds like everyone knew what that bastard was doing - an "open secret" as it were.
ON EDIT: And kindly knock off the "supposed liberal" slurs just because I think Hillary is a bad candidate.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I've been putting up - for 6 months now - being called a right winger, a bigot a corporatist and several other things simply because I prefer Hillary to Bernie. I must have missed your defense of me. And frankly, and I've said this before to many posters - I find it hard to take anyone who uses juvenile emoticons seriously.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Your inability to understand their use is not my problem.
I don't name call. If I saw it, I would have alerted. I do my best to treat other posters with courtesy per the "old school" rules of this board.
I think your preferred candidate is horrible. That doesn't give either one of us license to personally smear or attack each other. You want to smear me as a "so called liberal" that is asshole bully behavior.
I invite you to take a moment and think about that. This is the Internet and passions can run high. Is that really who you want to be here?
If so, I can put you on ignore. If not, I will accept an apology.
We can have different opinions without being assholes about it.
Your move.
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Try harder. Your post #20 in this thread basically accused a DUer of being "comfortable" with pedophiles.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)I understand their use and I find them juvenile and believe they have no place on a board not inhabited by children. Being the bigger person has only gotten me shit on these days so I wont be apologizing. So go ahead an put me on ignore if those are the only choices available. IF I see evidence that you're evenhanded about calling out those who think they get to decide who liberals are, I will absolutely apologize, but not until then.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)liberal" which on this board is a smear implying I don't belong here and am not a liberal (which I am, which is why I support Bernie Sanders/not Hillary). The fact you have been insulted by other people does not make it acceptable for you to treat me that way.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)So go ahead and put me on ignore because you just did the same fucking thing as you accuse me of doing right here:
which I am, which is why I support Bernie Sanders/not Hillary
The implication being liberals would ONLY support Bernie. Thanks for proving my point so freeking eloquently.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)And you assume that when I say "and that's why I support Bernie" that the meta message is YOU ARE NOT because you support Hillary.
So, even though I am NOT saying you AREN'T a liberal, in your head it's a contest and one of us has to be lying.
Instead of us both being Democrats who support different candidates, which is what the usual assumption is when people are long standing members of a DEMOCRATIC MESSAGE BOARD.
Here is the thing -- the "you aren't a liberal" message is IN YOUR HEAD while the "Ida is a so called liberal" (obvious paraphrase) was TYPED BY YOU.
Taking a break now. I can't help you, so I'm done for a while.
leftynyc
(26,060 posts)hypocrisy makes you want to bang your head against the wall. Gee -it's hardly my fault that being able to read English made you look so bad here.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)"If she's a liberal, then she thinks I'm not."
You also can't stop yourself from being obnoxious.
Off to ignore! Because real liberals don't deal with abusive bullies (and by that I mean you).
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)Great response(s)!
homegirl
(1,428 posts)treated Monica VERY "unfairly."
!. Linda Tripp - her alleged "friend" who sold this young woman, she was 21, to the GOP and the press for a hefty sum.
2. Her mother who failed to burn the infamous blue dress.
Never forget Monica was a willing and active participant in the Oval Office.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)on TED Talks. She was 22 and her boss was thirty years older and married. There really is no defense for his behavior. She was young and stupid. He was old and horny?
http://www.ted.com/talks/monica_lewinsky_the_price_of_shame?language=en
SunSeeker
(51,550 posts)To this day Lewinsky maintains the relationship with Bill Clinton was consensual.
Hekate
(90,674 posts)Monica and her mother went into what I can only think of as the "Starr Chamber" to be questioned by that cabal, and came out looking like they were about to faint. Seriously, they looked sick.
In Medieval torture chambers there was a preliminary practice called "displaying the instruments of torture" -- it was used to terrify the victims into an immediate confession. Of course, this being the bad old days, there was no point in letting a nice hot fire go to waste, so the main event would go on as planned.
Nowadays we are more civilized -- we have lawyers like Ken Starr.
So what I figured is that particular session was for displaying the instruments of torture to those two hapless women, one of them young and oh-so-foolish.
trumad
(41,692 posts)I'll miss you.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)If Hillary does become the nominee, and they require a loyalty oath, I will miss this place, too.
I think she stands a good chance of fracturing the party. Or maybe just chasing a percentage of us away.
They will not find a way. You either support the nominee and that includes Bernie if he pulls it off ....
Or...you will be shown the door if you post anti-nominee BS.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)Last edited Tue May 24, 2016, 05:49 PM - Edit history (1)
the Hillary fans.
Fact: She screwed up Libya.
Fact: She voted for the IWR and never held Bush accountable for lying.
Fact: She has taken millions of dollars in speaking fees from the banking industry and will not disclose the contents of those speeches.
Fact: Her State Department did not comply with FOIA laws.
Fact: She has been under investigation by the FBI for almost a year and there is a good chance she will be facing an indictment.
Fact: She was adamantly publicly opposed to marriage equality.
Fact: She has stated a willingness to support constitutional restrictions on abortion.
Fact: She has double digit "untrustworthy" scores.
Fact: The Clinton Foundation took millions of dollars in contributions from foreign sources and hid the money through a California subsidiary after making an agreement not to do so while she was in office.
Fact: The Libyan Foreign Minister gave Bill Clinton $500k two days after the Benghazi attacks.
The list goes on...fortunately, I am allowed to discuss these facts right now. My opinion is that she should have been bounced out right about the time the FBI recovered the "deleted personal emails" because that involved breaking the law with destruction of public records.
I am going to trust the owners of this site to figure things out. I am also clapping like crazy for the indictment fairy, although the complete lack of shame so far exhibited means there is a good chance she will still try to stay in the race, further Nixoning the Democratic brand, because that's just who she is.
In the meantime, the owners of this site have choices to make. This is their playground, and I will respect their choices.
Sites evolve and rules change. I miss the old rules, where courtesy and "don't be an asshole" were common sense.
Sigh. She's a divisive figure. Some people like her. Some people like Trump. I can't stand either of them.
Then again, I hate Bush Junior, too. But I love President Obama.
thesquanderer
(11,986 posts)to be fair, being impeached is like being arrested. Being arrested for something is not the same as being convicted of something, i.e. you're still presumed innocent until proven guilty, and ultimately, they found him not guilty.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)was "no big deal". He lied under oath. He did it to cover up the fact he was a serial cheater. The only thing that saved him was that most of us could separate consensual adult sexual behavior from him doing his job as President. In hindsight, he should have stepped down and let President Gore take over. Plus, the Republicans were just as bad and worse at governing.
It's a permanent stain on his presidency.
thesquanderer
(11,986 posts)re: "He lied under oath." Well, not according to the Senate who acquitted him.
Being a serial cheater is not grounds for impeachment.
IdaBriggs
(10,559 posts)There is no question he was guilty of both. I am well aware of the politics of the situation, and the insanity of making his consensual sexual life a matter of state was extremely partisan.
With that being said, again with the benefit of hindsight, the whole mess started because he was being sued and was under the mistaken impression that being President would make that go away.
Moral of the Story: people with personal legal troubles should not be on the ballot.
Yes, that means both Trump and Clinton. Sigh.
thesquanderer
(11,986 posts)Not to defend Trump (ugh!) but AFAIK his legal troubles are only civil suits. Which means the worst possible outcome for him is having to come up with a bunch of money. In fact, if he wanted to, he could end the "legal troubles" at any time, just by paying the money. But naturally, he's going to court to try to avoid having to pay the money.
Hillary's potential legal troubles are more serious. In this case, it is not within her power to end them. And at least in theory, the possible penalties are more severe.
OTOH, if people are supposed to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, it's hard to say she doesn't have a right to be on the ballot. The question would be whether people are still willing to vote for her, but apparently the answer is yes!
gwheezie
(3,580 posts)Is reason to leave office. Seriously, he lied about sex.
scscholar
(2,902 posts)That's horrible. I guess that why he call him a "terrific guy."
Hiraeth
(4,805 posts)lapfog_1
(29,199 posts)its going to be a very ugly campaign
I'm guessing that both sides will dredge up such crap on the other person that we will have a record low voter turn out and that both candidates negatives will reach almost unheard of levels.
The person that "wins" this will be so unpopular at inauguration that we will BEG Obama to stay on for 1 more term.
We can forget a campaign of ideals and policies.
hollowdweller
(4,229 posts)The older woman had been married 3x and I always thought it strange she had cred on relationships.
procon
(15,805 posts)to make themselves look better.
He should get a prize for giving so much ammunition for Hillary and her PACs, the Democratic Party and other Dem candidates to use against him.
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)A woman who is married to a man who's had several women accuse him of rape vs. a man who's married several women and thinks lowly of them.
I don't see a winner in this comparison.
jwirr
(39,215 posts)videohead5
(2,172 posts)When Hillary married Bill no one had accused him of anything then.several women has accused him of rape?...I only know of Mrs Broaddrick that has accused him of rape after she sworn in an affidavit that nothing happened and the next time Bill came to Mrs Broaddrick's town after the alleged rape she called the local media wanting them to cover the Governors visit.
You accusing Bill Clinton of rape?
videohead5
(2,172 posts)I was replying to d legendary1.that said Bill had been accused of rape by several women.I only know of one and I was only pointing out holes in her story.read the post before me.
trumad
(41,692 posts)My bad
videohead5
(2,172 posts)d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)who claimed that Bubba raped/assaulted/groped them before, during, and after his marriage to HRC. Here's the list of the women who made the claims:
Juanita Broaddrick
Kathleen Willey
Paula Jones
Eileen Wellstone
Sandra Allen James
Christy Zercher
Carolyn Moffet
Helen Dowdy
Becky Brown
Regina Blakely Hopper
And that's not including the women he's had consensual sex with:
Monica Lewinsky
Elizabeth Ward Gracen
Connie Hamzy
Gennifer Flowers
Dolly Kyle Browning
Sally Miller (Perdue)
Lencola Sullivan
So how exactly does this help HRC?
videohead5
(2,172 posts)Blaming her is pathetic.some of these women not all have been caught in lies.like Kathleen Willey trying to get her friend to lie about what happened.she changed her story more than once.
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)who accused Bill Cosby of the same things Bubba was accused of? That those women lied about their experiences? You are judged by the company you keep, as the old saying goes.
That's HRC's husband. People are judged by the company they keep. Its not pathetic, but quite alarming should Trump decide to dig in further.
videohead5
(2,172 posts)Bill Clinton never drugged anyone.Trump is just as bad if not worse than Bill Clinton.
d_legendary1
(2,586 posts)Bubba never had to drug anyone. He just came up to them and got it. And Cosby has him beat by 40+ more women so totally not the same. I get it. And Trump is worse because his ex-wife is the only one who's alleged that he raped her.
videohead5
(2,172 posts)Lawsuit filed in California against Trump for rape when the accuser was 13.
http://heavy.com/news/2016/04/donald-trump-jeffrey-epstein-katie-johnson-lawsuit-accused-rape-teen-girl-sex-slave-documents-pdf/
Kingofalldems
(38,454 posts)Pretty broad accusation there.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)I wish it were bizarre, but it's more like SOP.
niyad
(113,284 posts)alas, it was NOT from the Onion
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10027851398
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)had various 'issue' in their own past, the folks who delivered DOMA included many a vow breaker. Not to name any names but the guy who signed DOMA did so in part to distract from his own marriage problems.
It's like that. Always.
Karma is a great entertainer.
Duppers
(28,120 posts)I've missed something on my mini-vacation.
Link please. Thanks.
mountain grammy
(26,620 posts)I believe she made the best choice for her as all women should. I wouldn't have faulted her no matter what she did.
Response to trumad (Original post)
Post removed
Democat
(11,617 posts)You aren't telling the truth, you're repeating right wing talking points.
emulatorloo
(44,120 posts)yuiyoshida
(41,831 posts)Automated Message
AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
Mail Message
On Tue May 24, 2016, 09:45 AM an alert was sent on the following post:
Dude, she's married to a serial rapist
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=7853112
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Ban this user please.
JURY RESULTS
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue May 24, 2016, 09:49 AM, and the Jury voted 5-2 to HIDE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Right Wing Speak.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: This post is absolute nonsense. It is actually libelous.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: So far over the top I almost wonder whether this is joke.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Disagreeing with the poster is not grounds for hiding or banning. This view is shared by many otherwise faithful Democrats.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Disgusting Right Wing propaganda. Agree with the alerter: "Ban this user please," especially since the user in question said "Go ahead and have me banned for telling the truth, this place is so thick with nauseating propaganda and apologia for the Clinton Crime Family that I can't even look at the posts anymore without feeling queasy. "
Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.
Cannot reply to au
Response to yuiyoshida (Reply #71)
Post removed
Hekate
(90,674 posts)I think if the poster wants to be banned by DU (as he says), DU should oblige.
Act_of_Reparation
(9,116 posts)But this is 2016, and, thanks to our buddy Driftglass, we actually have a term to describe this phenomenon: Strategic Forgettery.
Ilsa
(61,695 posts)about her marriage.
vi5
(13,305 posts)It's the same move that had a draft dodger attacking a war hero on his military service in Bush Vs. Kerry. Or a bungling Governer attacking the VP of a successful presidential administration on the economy in Bush. vs. Gore
It's taking either your weakness or your opponent's strength and attacking them with it before the bell even rings.
I'm not sure exactly how many times we have to see Republicans make this move before Democrats get the hint.
Jackie Wilson Said
(4,176 posts)deport 11 million Latino's which will actually destroy the lives of about 20 million people, and in the afternoon he will nuke N. Korea because somebody there told a joke about his comb over.
This other stuff is not gonna be important at that point.
Those who facilitated his being in the WH will be responsible, those who didnt, wont be.
mcar
(42,307 posts)More suitable for GDP per Skinner's directive.