Hillary truly is all powerful

[BainsBane]

She can even manipulate the space-time continuum to plant someone in a group at the U of Chicago, so that some fifty years later they cast doubt on Bernie.

[Skidmore]

1. Dayum, BB.

That's on the scale of the President's birth announcement in the newspaper. YUUUUGE! Genius!

[Chitown Kev]

2. She used Dr. Doom's time machine...waitaminute

does that mean that Hillary IS Dr. Doom?

[winter is coming]

3. More likely, Dr. Doofenschmirtz. n/t

[BainsBane]

4. Or is she just pretending to be Dr. Doom?

And really has this guy doing her dirty work?
/

[Cha]

5. Right.. just like Obama's family had the foresight to make a Birth Announcement in

the Honolulu Newpaper for August 4, 1961.. knowing he'd need it one day when he was POTUS.. because ..inanity of birthers.

Anyway..



Thank you, BB.

[Iliyah]

27. Better yet, Kenya was able to fax the birth announcement (certificate) to Hawaii because they knew

Barack Hussein Obama would one day run for President of the United States of America.

Thats how it got into that gawd awful newspaper.

[rbrnmw]

6. Where is Dr Emmett Brown?

I bet he took her back in the time machine to plant that photo

[freshwest]

42. We'd be back to the future but can't leave the past. But since you asked:

I remember when I had a condo and my next door neighbor had one of those stainless steel DeLoreans. It was the first time in my life that I felt lust for a car, LOL! I wanted one sooo bad. But could never afford one...

[Thinkingabout]

7. NEVER underestimate the power of a woman.

[sheshe2]

8. HA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boom! That is wonderful, Thinkingabout.

They do it at their peril!

[sheshe2]

9. ;)

[freshwest]

10. I beg to differ with the first image, and replace the second with my favorite that applies to HRC:

Every wingnut has called her a wild eyed radical and a socialist/communist since the 1990s. The Democratic Party needs the elusive Red Panda vote to win in 2016.

But Patrick Stewart already uploaded his vote for her:

[BainsBane]

11. Uploading votes is part of her omnipotency

and why resistance is futile. If someone can change events 50 years in the past, they can control all of us.

Seriously, think about it a minute. If she is truly as powerful as some of her detractors claim, what's the point of even promoting another candidate?

[freshwest]

40. Well of course. She's of the same 'ilk' as Obama. You knew about the jump room and his trip to Mars?

I can post it here if you like. It's a real hoot, just like this is gonna be. It's true, it was on the intertubes! Oh, Gawd, I love conspiracy!

[OilemFirchen]

44. And he did it all without resistors.

"We don't need no steenking resistors!"

[freshwest]

45. He used his control of energy to power the wormhole and wah-lah! His first Martian mission!

He was only 15 years old, pretty young to be recruited by the CIA, don't you think?

It must have been those special alien abilities...

[freshwest]

80. And she's still a socialist/commie. Proof:

It all began with her 'It Takes a Village: And Other Lessons Children Teach Us' socialist thing she pushed years ago. We all know she's still pushing this stuff!

Why do supporters deny her commie tendencies? And her defense of Saul Alinsky and class warfare, why is it hidden from the media? Will she send RWNJs to re-education camps?

The rightwingers KNOW how dangerous she is. This has always been why they hated her. Well, there was that little thing about her working with Democrats in Congress in 1974 to impeach Nixon.

That left a big mark, you know. The GOP knows her election will be TEOTWAWKI, Bain.

[MannyGoldstein]

24. ...

[lovemydog]

70. That is the reason

she's my third choice in the primaries. I know it was 'long ago' and I know her explanation and I know a lot of others voted for that resolution. But most democrats did not. My congressman and one of my senators did not vote for it. At the time I remember having lunch with my dad the next day. He was disgusted by her cynical attempt to try to 'position herself' as being on the 'popular side' of the war for her first presidential campaign. Maybe it didn't 'make much difference' as some say, but I felt at the time as did a vocal minority of Americans that it was the wrong vote to take, from an ethical and moral standpoint and also in terms of our national security. I believe my dad was correct in that assessment, and a lot of others were as well.

[ibegurpard]

12. Guess that's why she got so mixed up

On the details of her "joining the marines" whopper. So hard to keep it all straight when you're flitting around the space time continuum...

[BainsBane]

13. I haven't seen any indication it's a whopper

I saw a garbled post alleging so, but it made absolutely no sense. Clinton says her pantsuit is blue and you all call her a liar. If Sanders is caught in one, people here either ignore it or pretend Clinton engineered some shapeshifting special power to substitute someone else for him in a photo and then "conveniently" (as one poster actually said) the guy died in 2006. But then again, logic is in on it with science as part of the Clintonian MSM conspiracy.

[840high]

14. Check when she was married, how old she was

and when she wanted to "join" Marines. All very clear.

[stupidicus]

15. She's just a political gadfly, worthy of a figurative swatting.

it's nice to see that her supporters are reduced to just making stuff up though.

[BainsBane]

19. No, I'm afraid I didn't make this up

If my imagination were anywhere near this fertile, I'd be a best selling fiction writer. Sadly, I am left to merely observe what others invent.

[stupidicus]

25. if you say so

some might think the flaw lies in your interpretation of whatever was said as opposed to them seriously pleading the case you've alleged they are making.

Regardless, one madman does not a case against Bernie or his supporters make, so this is really little more than a post about what you want others to believe -- on the basis of your word alone -- about some unnamed Bernie supporter. I'm underwhelmed.

it looks like a victimless snark attack to me, unless you're wounded...lol

[72DejaVu]

26. You know what Hilary supporters are making up?

A majority.

[Iliyah]

28. Oh snap

[stupidicus]

33. how so?

their response was basically a non-topical rhetorical question that left all the material it was a response to wholly unaddressed and unrebutted.

so, the attempted snark on the part of your pal snapped exactly what?

Of course there's always the possibility that the poor thing couldn't understand what it was they tried to respond to.

Again, how does that snap anything other than the credibility of your alleged "snapper"?

[LuvLoogie]

36. I'll have ranch with that...

[stupidicus]

30. how so?

that's what the polls would currently indicate, no?

[MannyGoldstein]

16. That resistor has as much impact as your post. nt

[BainsBane]

17. Really?

You apparently think yours are clever. I disagree. I think Cosmicone has us both beat.

You ought to be having words with the folks who are spreading the conspiracy theories. If they would keep to the reality-based world, there would be no need for posts like this.

[MannyGoldstein]

22. It just cracks me up that you've posted the World's most pointless

circuit as support for your post.

Breathtaking.

As to my posts, just 'em any way you want. For me, they're just catharsis, anything beyond that is gravy.

[OilemFirchen]

34. The World's (sic) most pointless circuit?

We'll add electrical and electronics engineering to the exponentially-growing list of disciplines about which you know nothing whatsoever.

Sound good?

[freshwest]

46. Yeah, some of us did take basic electricity courses. BTW, this is all a game, right?

Just never be the ground, that's what I'd say.

[OilemFirchen]

60. One hand in a pocket, whenever possible.

I learned that the hard way. Perhaps it came to our interlocutor naturally.

[MannyGoldstein]

54. LOL!

Now you're @#$%ing with Kirchoff. Bad idea.

[OilemFirchen]

59. At least spell his name correctly, ferchrissakes.

Probably 5-10 billion resistors in an i7-5960X. Not bad for a gimcrack.

What happened? Lose your ass on Radio Shack stock?


On edit: Ooops. Trillion. My bad.

[Scootaloo]

18. I have no idea what you're talking about...

But that first gif made me giggle. I'm a sucker for science humor.

[BainsBane]

21. Well, the newest is

That the people at U of Chicago who say that Bernie wasn't a speaker at the event with the photo were put up to it by Hillary Clinton. The whole story questioning that Sanders may be a mere mortal and either be mistaken or told a fib is, we have been instructed, fruit of the Clintonian-Rovian conspiracy. It's the new version of Obama's mom supposedly planting his birth announcement in the Hawaii newspapers 54 years ago. You know that old one. This is time traveling redux.

[Scootaloo]

23. I've been at work all day, I must have missed the latest

[JonLeibowitz]

52. The poster is lying anyway

Nobody at UChicago is claiming Sanders was not involved in the sit-in. They just don't know for sure if the specific picture that UChicago has always had labeled as Sanders is in fact him or someone who looks uncannily similar.

Let me repeat: nobody doubts that Sanders was involved in, helps organize, and spoke at that specific protest. But the lies and twisting of fact continue.

[Scootaloo]

55. What? Bainsbane speaking untruths?

Why sir, surely you speak in jest.

[JonLeibowitz]

56. The post may even deserve an alert, but I am not sure if it is quite at that level

It is quite blatant however.

[Scootaloo]

57. And that would hide the resistor joke. n/t

[BainsBane]

62. As reported in Time magazine

There was just one problem: Four University of Chicago alumni who went to school with Sanders tell TIME they believe that the dramatic photo of Sanders, which his campaign has featured on its website and in a promotional video, is not in fact a photograph of Sanders. An archivist at the University of Chicago agreed in January that Sanders was not the speaker in the photo, though the school’s official decision on the man’s identity is still pending.

http://time.com/4108379/bernie-sanders-photo-civil-rights/?xid=tcoshare

It's only his official campaign photo proclaiming his great leadership in civil rights matters. Too bad it's not him. But naturally I must be a liar for daring to suggest that Sanders may be mortal, and such heresy cannot be permitted. Naturally I'm a liar since I do not display absolute and total deference for authority required of a true "progressive" who must never under any circumstances question elected officials. A true progressive obeys, prostrating themselves before the alter of a great man whose political ascendency trumps any and all issues or concerns lowly voters might raise. But yeah, call me a liar. That will show me for mouthing off, imagining I'm actually a citizen with the right to make public utterances recalling what I read in the press. How dare I.

[JonLeibowitz]

64. No. Again, please stop spreading untruths

Read carefully:

That the people at U of Chicago who say that Bernie wasn't a speaker at the event with the photo

Nobody you quoted above is saying Bernie wasn't a speaker at the event with the photo. They are saying he may not be the one pictured there. big difference.

[BainsBane]

72. I see

Using "a" instead of "the" clearly makes me a liar, whereas using photos of another person for campaign purposes is completely honest.

[JonLeibowitz]

77. Indeed, language matters. I am glad that you agree

Even with the word 'the' it would still be misleading. He was (one of) the speaker(s) at the event; just possibly not the one in that photo. Again, nobody disputes this. Please do not spread untruths on DU.

I haven't seen him use that picture for campaign purposes. What I do know is that the University of Chicago has had the picture listed as him in their archives for decades, and journalists used it since it is a matter of record as being him.

[BainsBane]

83. Yes, language matters

and you clearly haven't even bothered to read the article you're insisting I lied about,not even the brief excerpt I provided. It says the Sanders campaign uses the photo on its website. You make false claims directly contradicted and then insult me as a liar for talking about what the article actually said.

What is clear is that you are furious anyone question Sanders in anyway and that you will insult in an effort to discourage discussion in order to promote the career of one man, whose political fortunes clearly trump truth, issues, and the rights of a lowly voter such as myself. Unfortunately for you, you've happened on a campaign strategy that can only undermine support, as we have witnessed even on DU. You might be able to create an environment in which some are afraid to express their views for fear of being met with personal attacks, but you and your friends won't be with them in the voting booth when they make their decisions. The appearance of conformity is not agreement, but that it means so much to you and some others says a great deal.

[JonLeibowitz]

85. You haven't refuted my critique of what you said.

Edit: i will grant you that the sanders campaign uses a picture that Uchicago has had him identified in for decades. I didn't mean to misrepresent the facts there, i only thought Maddow was the person who used it. Apologies.

However, your mistruth still is a mistruth

[edbermac]

88. Jury results.

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service
On Fri Nov 13, 2015, 05:13 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yes, language matters
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1251&pid=803270

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Asking someone to not spread untruths about a candidate deserves none of the verbal abuse that the OP ultimately received.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Nov 13, 2015, 05:20 PM, and the Jury voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is a personal battle....I don't see any TOS violaation
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[riversedge]

73. How did that photo get in his campaign literature?

Curious as never heard form the camp yet. Has anyone??

[JonLeibowitz]

75. I don't know that it is in his campaign literature

Source that it is? Rachel Maddow was the one who put it up on screen at the forum

I do know that the University of Chicago has it in their archives listed as him. IF he does have it in his literature, I would guess it is from his alma mater.

Regardless, this is a non-story; wouldn't you agree?

[riversedge]

76. I think memories can get fuzzy after all these years.

That hold true for all candidates. Will leave it at that.

[JonLeibowitz]

78. I take it you are speaking of the archivists' at UChicago, who have it listed as him for decades. nt

[freshwest]

47. You know, Jeb would invade Kenya for decieving Murikans. Just sayin' n/t

[JonLeibowitz]

51. .

Your statement listed below is a falsehood.

That the people at U of Chicago who say that Bernie wasn't a speaker at the event with the photo were put up to it by Hillary Clinton

Nobody at the University Chicago is saying any such thing. Here is what the article says:

An archivist at the University of Chicago agreed in January that Sanders was not the speaker in the photo, though the school’s official decision on the man’s identity is still pending.

and

There is no question that Sanders, who has so far largely failed to attract black supporters of his candidacy, was deeply involved in civil rights activism at the University of Chicago, including the sit-in depicted in the photo, a protest of the university’s segregated housing practices.

Nobody doubts that Sanders was involved with nor spoke at the event in question. The only question is if this particular picture is of him and not someone who looks very similar. Please do not spread untruths on DU.

[George II]

82. Wow..."YOUR" (meaning the OP) "statement listed below is a falsehood"?

DIRECTLY from the TIME article:

"There was just one problem: Four University of Chicago alumni who went to school with Sanders tell TIME they believe that the dramatic photo of Sanders, which his campaign has featured on its website and in a promotional video, is not in fact a photograph of Sanders. An archivist at the University of Chicago agreed in January that Sanders was not the speaker in the photo, though the school’s official decision on the man’s identity is still pending.

So what was it that Bainsbain said is "false"?

[JonLeibowitz]

84. .

Bainsbain said:

the people at U of Chicago who say that Bernie wasn't a speaker at the event with the photo

Nobody at Uchicago is saying this. Everyone agrees that Bernie was a leader for the event in question. The question is merely about who is in the picture.

[zeemike]

20. It's really odd when we use the same method as the right wing does.

But I guess there may be not that much difference between the true believers on either side.

But this is the same thing the right did to discredit criticize of Bush...the use of hyperbole and ridiculous claims to shut up those critical of him.
The message is clear, if you listen to them then you believe all kinds of crazy things...guilt by association.

Yes we suck sometimes too.

[Kalidurga]

29. People can look at these two images and figure it out for themselves.

/

[ucrdem]

32. This one looks different:

U Chicago identifies this one as "Bernie Sanders speaks on the first day of the sit-in" and Time identifies the first one you posted as "Bruce Rappaport at the University of Chicago in the early 1960s," respective links:

http://photoarchive.lib.uchicago.edu/db.xqy?one=apf4-01698.xml

http://time.com/4108379/bernie-sanders-photo-civil-rights/?xid=tcoshare

I can't say who is who but if they're misidentified on Bernie's site or materials that's going to be a problem for him.

[Kalidurga]

38. Well the hair looks like Bruce's

But the ears look like Bernie's.

[ucrdem]

41. I don't think this will be a problem UNLESS

Bernie gets the nom. Then the GOP will make it a huge deal. But I don't think the Clinton campaign would touch it, even if the tables were to turn. JMHO.

[freshwest]

48. I think BS said that was Rappaport there. He recognized him by his height, body type and stance.

This is a funny thread, also very revealing.

[Kalidurga]

65. It doesn't matter to me they both were working on the same issue

Bernie was at some sit ins. I am surprised there are any pictures it's not like people did these things thinking hey this is going to be a historical event.

[ucrdem]

69. Up until this point I thought he'd gone to Yale.

Dunno why, but yeah, revealing. Good to see you here fresh!

[NBachers]

63. I thought the top one looked like Young Al Franken

[DianeK]

31. her and ..

the great and powerful Wizard of Oz manipulating all those bells, whistles and buttons behind the curtain

[Iliyah]

35. Thanks BB for the lighthearted thread

Kick

[fbc]

37. Is this as serious as Clinton's claims about being under fire in Bosnia?

Let's see...

Bernie was in Chicago organizing, nobody can dispute that. And Hillary was also indisputably in Bosnia - there's video.

then...

Someone apparently mislabeled a picture of someone that looks very similar to Bernie Sanders. While Hillary Clinton lied repeatedly about being under sniper fire and then had to apologize for lying about it.

I may be biased, but I have to think most people would agree that Hillary lying repeatedly about her past is more serious than someone else mislabeling a picture of Bernie Sanders.

[Kalidurga]

39. I don't think it's a mislabeled

picture. Either of them. Now I have seen threads with two different pictures saying that it's not Bernie. One clearly is Bernie. The other I also think is him, based on some very prominent ears that Bruce doesn't have. But, I am not an expert on identifying people in old black and white photos.

[BainsBane]

43. Of course not

Clinton is evil and Sanders is perfect. Any error by Sanders is Clinton's fault, since he has no responsibility for his own actions, including votes against gun control or immunity for gun corporations, votes for the minutemen and the Wall, the F-35, against Immigration Reform or the Amber Alert. All of that is the fault of Clinton who bent the space-time continuum to distort the congressional record so that it only seems like he made those votes. Or she is manipulating Democrats into believing those are issues that matter, as though the 32,000 deaths a year from guns are people whose lives actually count. She also got inside his mouth at the debate and forced him to deny voting for immunity for gun corporations. As a perfect, liminal being, Bernie is not capable of deception so clearly it was Clinton's fault. Science and logic are also in on the Clinton-MSM-Rovian conspiracies. One must never employ either or be labeled "turd way," deservedly shunned from civilization.

The issue is not that someone mislabelled the picture but that Bernie says it is him and they he claims he led that event there, that it comprises his civil rights bonafides. There is in fact a question of whether he actually spoke at the event because others who were there say he did not. However, they have been forced to say that by the evil, time-traveling and shapeshifting Hillary Clinton who as long as fifty years ago conspired to keep the liminal being that is Bernie Sanders from assuming his rightful place as President of the United States. While others say he was not there, they are clearly lying because he is the true Civil Rights hero, who has done more for Civil Rights than anyone in any election or in congress. I read that last part on DU so it must be true. Anyone who questions any of that is not a real person but a corporate shill. Real people do not question liminal beings. They stay in the place and display absolute deference for the absolute authority of the truly perfect leader, Bernie Sanders.

Oh, just in case.

[ibegurpard]

49. the sarcasm tag wasn't necessary

That wasn't sarcasm...it was a petulant mewling word salad.

[freshwest]

50. There's a youtube video of her shapeshifting. Also Obama, Bush and the Queen of England...

Wonder how many believe it?

[freshwest]

53. I think you meant to say luminous being instead of liminal... n/t

[BainsBane]

61. No, I meant liminal

Last edited Fri Nov 13, 2015, 04:20 AM - Edit history (1)

As in a space between god and man, transcendent.
But you could easily substitute any number of adjectives.

[Scootaloo]

58. Have you checked your carbon monoxide detector recently?

[bravenak]

67. Agree.

[Warren DeMontague]

66. ZOMG PHOTGAZI! PICSHURGATE! CALL CONGRESS RIGHT NOW!

Oh my god it might not be him in the picture. Holy fucking shit, that's really gonna torpedo the dude.

I'd be surprised if anyone thinks Hillary "arranged" this, but what isn't surprising is that some of her supporters here think this is some sort of scoop.

[beam me up scottie]

68. They're the new birthers, Warren.

We're not saying that Bernie didn't participate in those activities but how can we really be sure he is who he says he is *wink wink nudge nudge*?

[riversedge]

74. You are a great fiction writer.

[ibegurpard]

71. exactly

And what's with the creepy Hillary picture on this? Makes me think of Evita Peron.

[ismnotwasm]

79. Heh!

[99Forever]

81. And condescending snark is such an attractive tactic.

I'm so surprised to see it here and from whom.

[William769]

86. Kick & highly recommended!

[R B Garr]

87. Don't forget Rachel Maddow is in on the CONSPIRACY!!!

She was obviously planted by Hillary to FORCE that picture on Sanders while he was.HELD CAPTIVE during her candidate Forum!!! Then the planted Univ of Chicago alum started the whole OPERATION going in the media which was planned 50years ago!!! She does this ALL the time!!!

This is outrageous!



Great thread, Bains. Surprised I didn't see it sooner.