Welcome guest, is this your first visit? Create Account now to join.
  • Login:

Welcome to the Online Debate Network.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 50

Hybrid View

  1. #1
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    For political gain, no less:

    "The Russian intelligence agency behind the 2016 election cyberattacks targeted Sen. Claire McCaskill as she began her 2018 re-election campaign in earnest, a Daily Beast forensic analysis reveals. That makes the Missouri Democrat the first identified target of the Kremlin’s 2018 election interference.

    In August 2017, around the time of the hack attempt, Trump traveled to Missouri and chided McCaskill, telling the crowd to “vote her out of office.” Just this last week, however, Trump said, on Twitter, that he feared Russians would intervene in the 2018 midterm elections on behalf of Democrats."

    _____


    Earlier this week I was listening to talk radio (right wing dominated talk radio that is) and was surprised to hear that the presenter was glad then Secretary of State Clinton was hacked. He was something of a Libertarian and I wish I had listened long enough to get his name, but I believe I've heard this sentiment before. Never mind there wasn't anything in her emails but don't let the facts get in your way, right?
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  2. #2
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    For political gain, no less:

    "The Russian intelligence agency behind the 2016 election cyberattacks targeted Sen. Claire McCaskill as she began her 2018 re-election campaign in earnest, a Daily Beast forensic analysis reveals. That makes the Missouri Democrat the first identified target of the Kremlin’s 2018 election interference.

    In August 2017, around the time of the hack attempt, Trump traveled to Missouri and chided McCaskill, telling the crowd to “vote her out of office.” Just this last week, however, Trump said, on Twitter, that he feared Russians would intervene in the 2018 midterm elections on behalf of Democrats."

    _____


    Earlier this week I was listening to talk radio (right wing dominated talk radio that is) and was surprised to hear that the presenter was glad then Secretary of State Clinton was hacked. He was something of a Libertarian and I wish I had listened long enough to get his name, but I believe I've heard this sentiment before. Never mind there wasn't anything in her emails but don't let the facts get in your way, right?
    While I won't go so far as to advocate hacking politicians as a matter of normal practice, I will say I found it rather amusing some truths were there for the public to see if they so chose. How refreshing for some honesty in politics for a change since I don't think anyone was saying any of it was made up.
    So if the Russians were trying to hurt Hillary's candidacy, at least they were doing it with the truth as apposed to making it all up.

    And in case you were going to ask, I probably would have found it amusing if it had happened to Trump/other republican candidate as well.

    In fact, that would have made it more "fair"

  3. #3
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I will say I found it rather amusing some truths were there for the public to see if they so chose.
    What truths?
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  4. #4
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    What truths?
    I assume then you have not read any of the emails in question, but no matter. That would change little in your mind anyway.

    The fact that Hillary and the Dem party were embarrassed by those emails and implored Rep's to "not use that information, since they could be hacked next and their secrets exposed", pretty clearly shows things were revealed that they wanted kept secret.

    We could argue things like "did Bernie even have a chance" or whatever, but the point is, pretty clearly, Hillary did not want those emails public! Since she did not say ANY of it was false/fabricated/made up, obviously what was in those emails was true and she did not want the public to know!
    What part of this doesn't make sense???

    May I ask, do you think either Bill or Hillary have ever done anything wrong, as in, are they even capable of doing wrong???

  5. #5
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    I assume then you have not read any of the emails in question, but no matter. That would change little in your mind anyway.
    Well, I don't know how you would know that. What emails in question?

    ---------- Post added at 12:29 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:28 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    "not use that information, since they could be hacked next and their secrets exposed"
    Where is this quote from?

    ---------- Post added at 12:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:29 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post

    May I ask, do you think either Bill or Hillary have ever done anything wrong, as in, are they even capable of doing wrong???
    Give me an example.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  6. #6
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Well, I don't know how you would know that.
    True, I don't know for sure. That comment was based on your past posts, what your most likely current position would be on this subject.

    ---------- Post added at 06:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:34 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    What emails in question?[COLOR="Silver"]
    The ones on Hillary's email server that were hacked and became public.

  7. #7
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    The ones on Hillary's email server that were hacked and became public.
    I think you have things a bit confused. Hillary's email server was never hacked (that we know of). The emails you are thinking of were from the DNC (democratic national committee) email servers Those emails show how the party insiders were trying to help Hillary defeate Bernie even though they are supposed to be neutral.

    Hillary's emails were made public by the government as part of the FBI investigation into whether she had violated espionage law by not using government email systems when she was Secretary of State. It was not the content of those emails that was a problem so much as where she had been storing them and who she'd sent them to.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  8. #8
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think you have things a bit confused. Hillary's email server was never hacked (that we know of). The emails you are thinking of were from the DNC (democratic national committee) email servers Those emails show how the party insiders were trying to help Hillary defeate Bernie even though they are supposed to be neutral.
    Yeah, I'm not sure I care about that. Was there a law broken? I thought Squatch talked about this once and they violated the party's bylaws or something.

    ---------- Post added at 12:21 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:13 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Hillary's emails were made public by the government as part of the FBI investigation into whether she had violated espionage law by not using government email systems when she was Secretary of State. It was not the content of those emails that was a problem so much as where she had been storing them and who she'd sent them to.
    Sure, I think I also discussed this with Squatch...stuff was classified and she was reprimanded. She did delete things, right? The 30,000? But they were recovered. There was some disagreement as to what should've been deleted and what saved, right?

    What I don't get is what do people think are in those emails.

    ---------- Post added at 12:25 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:21 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post

    Huh?
    I asked:
    "May I ask, do you think either Bill or Hillary have ever done anything wrong, as in, are they even capable of doing wrong??? "

    "Give me an example" does not answer that question nor does it seek clarification.

    For example.
    I like Ronald Reagan as a president. I also believe he did some things that were wrong and should not have been done!!

    How about you and the Clinton's??[COLOR="Silver"]
    Hmm, something they did wrong that I think they were wrong to do...I really can't think of anything offhand. Give me an example of something you think they did wrong and let's see if I agree.

    ---------- Post added at 12:28 PM ---------- Previous post was at 12:25 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post

    True , though off Op, I find it telling that the left wasn't more outraged by this![COLOR="Silver"]
    Why? I live in Massachusetts and voted for Bernie and he lost here. He should have dropped out shortly thereafter.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  9. #9
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Yeah, I'm not sure I care about that. Was there a law broken? I thought Squatch talked about this once and they violated the party's bylaws or something.
    Well, the hacking broke laws, but not the emails. The party maintained they were neutral, but the emails showed that was not true. The real significance of them is they greatly angered some of Sanders supporters and cemented them against Hillary. (Though that is somewhat irrational as Hillary wasn't at all in direct control of what the DNC was doing.) But at any rate, they had an impact and I still see anti-establishment leftists complaining bitterly about it from time to time so it was impactful. Though seriously, who didn't think they were in the bag for Hillary? It's pretty naive.

    THough, I would not say that means the primary was "rigged" as some conclude. The DNC was also in the bag for Hillary during Obama's first run. I was at caucuses and the party faithful totally backed her. He just had so many outsider supporters show up the insiders were totally overwhelmed. Bernie just didn't quite generate that level of outsider support such that it could overcome the insider preference.

    Sure, I think I also discussed this with Squatch...stuff was classified and she was reprimanded. She did delete things, right? The 30,000? But they were recovered. There was some disagreement as to what should've been deleted and what saved, right?
    Well, she didn't delete anything (at least not that anyone can prove or has been admitted). The IT company that administrated her server deleted a buch of archived emails. They say it was an accident. But the timeing, and the fact the Clinton campaign had some calls into them around that time, make many suspicious that it was intentional. They were supposedly personal emails rather than state department emails, but when recovered by the FBI they found quite a few that they deemed to be related to her state department work.

    I think we can definately say she acted in a way to protect herelf as much as she could while claiming to be complying with the investigation. Not total stonewalling, but not what we might call full and ready compliance either. Definately walking the tight rope where she looks really bad in public opinion, but it's hard to take her to court over it.

    What I don't get is what do people think are in those emails.
    Well, they were looking for dirt on Benghazi. But mostly what they found was just her doing her job, but doing it in a way that wasn't very secure or in compliance with the security regulations for the state department. Some call it criminal, others just sloppy. (I tend to feel that whatever the case, it would be very hard to prove criminality in court.)
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  10. #10
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Sure, I think I also discussed this with Squatch...stuff was classified and she was reprimanded. She did delete things, right? The 30,000? ut they were recovered. There was some disagreement as to what should've been deleted and what saved, right?
    Would that mean she did something wrong??

    ---------- Post added at 06:49 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:43 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Hmm, something they did wrong that I think they were wrong to do...I really can't think of anything offhand.
    Hmmmm, you said:
    "Well, I don't know how you would know that."
    in post #5.

    Since you believe both Clinton's are above the normal human condition, (in that ALL people have actually done wrong, including the Clinton's and every other human that ever lived) that is how I came to that conclusion. Just by your own words.

    ---------- Post added at 07:08 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:49 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Why? I live in Massachusetts and voted for Bernie and he lost here. He should have dropped out shortly thereafter.
    Had the Dem party allowed a fair and open contest, Bernie might not have lost is kinda the point, and your guy might have one over Trump!!!
    I may have voted for him for instance, and a lot of other People that would never vote for Hillary may have as well.

    It amazes me this doesn't bother you at all having your choice being trampled by the "more informed leaders" of the Dem party.

    This would by one of the reasons "Dem's are more extreme than Rep's" as the other thread would say....

    I have not heard a Rep say their candidate could not do/have not done anything wrong.......EVER....
    I have heard an endless supply tell me Clintons could/did not do wrong.

  11. #11
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Where is this quote from?[COLOR="Silver"]
    My girlfriend used to watch the news on tv and I overheard the remark or similar, on several occasions. I don't remember who said it or if it was the same person each time.

    ---------- Post added at 07:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:52 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    Give me an example.
    Huh?
    I asked:
    "May I ask, do you think either Bill or Hillary have ever done anything wrong, as in, are they even capable of doing wrong??? "

    "Give me an example" does not answer that question nor does it seek clarification.

    For example.
    I like Ronald Reagan as a president. I also believe he did some things that were wrong and should not have been done!!

    How about you and the Clinton's??

    ---------- Post added at 07:53 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:00 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think you have things a bit confused. Hillary's email server was never hacked (that we know of). The emails you are thinking of were from the DNC (democratic national committee) email servers Those emails show how the party insiders were trying to help Hillary defeate Bernie even though they are supposed to be neutral.

    Hillary's emails were made public by the government as part of the FBI investigation into whether she had violated espionage law by not using government email systems when she was Secretary of State. It was not the content of those emails that was a problem so much as where she had been storing them and who she'd sent them to.
    I admit, I mistakenly was thinking of Podesta's email acc't that was hacked when I posted, though it does seem quite likely Hillary's was hacked as well considering her level of security on her personal server.

    ---------- Post added at 07:57 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:53 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    Those emails show how the party insiders were trying to help Hillary defeate Bernie even though they are supposed to be neutral.
    True , though off Op, I find it telling that the left wasn't more outraged by this!

    ---------- Post added at 07:58 PM ---------- Previous post was at 07:57 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    It was not the content of those emails that was a problem so much as where she had been storing them and who she'd sent them to.
    Also off Op, but there were issues with content.

  12. #12
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    For political gain, no less:

    "The Russian intelligence agency behind the 2016 election cyberattacks targeted Sen. Claire McCaskill as she began her 2018 re-election campaign in earnest, a Daily Beast forensic analysis reveals. That makes the Missouri Democrat the first identified target of the Kremlin’s 2018 election interference.

    In August 2017, around the time of the hack attempt, Trump traveled to Missouri and chided McCaskill, telling the crowd to “vote her out of office.” Just this last week, however, Trump said, on Twitter, that he feared Russians would intervene in the 2018 midterm elections on behalf of Democrats."

    _____


    Earlier this week I was listening to talk radio (right wing dominated talk radio that is) and was surprised to hear that the presenter was glad then Secretary of State Clinton was hacked. He was something of a Libertarian and I wish I had listened long enough to get his name, but I believe I've heard this sentiment before. Never mind there wasn't anything in her emails but don't let the facts get in your way, right?
    So, according to your link, the Russian Hacking tried to affect the elections by basically releasing actual true confidential emails from the DNC and Hillary to the public? Is this correct?

    Also, are you implying the US is not doing similar "hacks" or otherwise trying to influence the elections of other Govt's all over the world?
    After all we wire tapped Chancellor Merkel's phone...

    http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-...213-story.html
    "The U.S. is no stranger to interfering in the elections of other countries"

    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b02d5d5ed382bd
    "Indeed, meddling in foreign politics is a great American pastime, and one that Clinton has some familiarity with. For more than 100 years, without any significant break, the U.S. has been doing whatever it can to influence the outcome of elections ― up to and including assassinating politicians it has found unfriendly."

    P:robably the US would not do that since it is against the law:

    https://spectator.org/obamas-meddlin...-six-examples/
    "Meddling in other’s elections is a violation of international law. In 1965, the United Nations General Assembly reaffirmed this with a resolution stating: “No State has the right to intervene, directly or indirectly, for any reason whatever, in the internal […] affairs of any other State.” And the International Court of Justice also considers such intervention to be illegal. More importantly, U.S. law prohibits the use of tax dollars to influence foreign elections."

    Since it is against international law and US tax dollars can not be used for such a purpose by US law, I am convinced the US would not try to influence another country's elections so we are justified in being outraged that a country would try to influence ours (*by allowing some truths to be known about one party only).



    *unless you are claiming they interfered in other ways as well

  13. #13
    ODN Community Regular

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Seattle, Washington USA
    Posts
    7,257
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    Since it is against international law and US tax dollars can not be used for such a purpose by US law, I am convinced the US would not try to influence another country's elections so we are justified in being outraged that a country would try to influence ours (*by allowing some truths to be known about one party only).
    It is quite possible to be outraged about both you know... I think our efforts to interfere in the affairs of other nations is generally reprehensible and ill-conceived. I also think it is important that we take reasonable steps to protect ourselves from such interference.
    Feed me some debate pellets!

  14. #14
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    It is quite possible to be outraged about both you know...
    I don't believe I have suggested otherwise, indeed, the reason for my sarcastic quote was to exemplify Americans trying to take the moral/legal high ground when our own gov't has/tried to assassinate other world leaders, let alone try to "influence" their countries elections.

    ---------- Post added at 09:33 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:29 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I think our efforts to interfere in the affairs of other nations is generally reprehensible and ill-conceived.
    I agree in general, though I do see times when it would benefit almost everyone. There have been/are situations where I think it was/is in the best interest of humanity that we intervene, but it shouldn't be our basic foreign policy.

    ---------- Post added at 09:38 PM ---------- Previous post was at 09:33 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    I also think it is important that we take reasonable steps to protect ourselves from such interference.
    Agreed. The threats are many and very real!

    However, we should have a fairly clear idea of what we are responding to, so our response is appropriate, PRIOR to responding, which goes against the spirit of this thread thus far...

  15. #15
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    goes against the spirit of this thread thus far...
    In which you'd be completely wrong.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  16. #16
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    White House blocks bill that would protect elections

    "As it currently stands, the legislation would grant every state’s top election official security clearance to receive threat information. It would also formalize the practice of information-sharing between the federal government—in particular, the Department of Homeland Security—and states regarding threats to electoral infrastructure. A technical advisory board would establish best practices related to election cybersecurity. Perhaps most significantly, the law would mandate that every state conduct a statistically significant audit following a federal election. It would also incentivize the purchase of voting machines that leave a paper record of votes cast, as opposed to some all-electronic models that do not. This would signify a marked shift away from all-electronic voting, which was encouraged with the passage of the Help Americans Vote Act in 2002."
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  17. #17
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    For political gain, no less:

    "The Russian intelligence agency behind the 2016 election cyberattacks targeted Sen. Claire McCaskill as she began her 2018 re-election campaign in earnest, a Daily Beast forensic analysis reveals. That makes the Missouri Democrat the first identified target of the Kremlin’s 2018 election interference.

    In August 2017, around the time of the hack attempt, Trump traveled to Missouri and chided McCaskill, telling the crowd to “vote her out of office.” Just this last week, however, Trump said, on Twitter, that he feared Russians would intervene in the 2018 midterm elections on behalf of Democrats."

    _____


    Earlier this week I was listening to talk radio (right wing dominated talk radio that is) and was surprised to hear that the presenter was glad then Secretary of State Clinton was hacked. He was something of a Libertarian and I wish I had listened long enough to get his name, but I believe I've heard this sentiment before. Never mind there wasn't anything in her emails but don't let the facts get in your way, right?
    So what have the "Russian cyberattacks" amounted to?
    IOW, what have they actually done, in their cyberattacks to "sway the elections"?

    I hear a lot of complaints about the Russians trying to sway the election, but not much specific about what they actually did (save for releasing confidential emails from the DNC) to accomplish this?

  18. #18
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    So what have the "Russian cyberattacks" amounted to?
    IOW, what have they actually done, in their cyberattacks to "sway the elections"?

    I hear a lot of complaints about the Russians trying to sway the election, but not much specific about what they actually did (save for releasing confidential emails from the DNC) to accomplish this?
    It doesn't matter to me, it's an attack. Unless you're saying they are just doing this for fun.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

  19. #19
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    683
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by CowboyX View Post
    It doesn't matter to me, it's an attack. Unless you're saying they are just doing this for fun.
    A very curious, if not a dangerous thought......
    It "doesn't matter" what their level of "meddling in US elections" our response should be the same???

    After all, if it is indeed an "attack" it could warrant a military response.
    (What if it turned out they did little more than what the US does in their elections?)

    Yes I do believe Putin gets a fair amount of enjoyment out of all this, so not "just" for fun, the fun is an added benefit for him.

    ---------- Post added at 04:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:02 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Sigfried View Post
    It is very difficult to measure what impact they had.
    Though their "impact" on the elections would be interesting to know, it's not at all what I asked.


    If the majority of the Russians "meddling" was releasing actual (true) confidential DNC email/memos to the American public (which is all I have been seeing in the news), I don't see it nearly as big an issue as say if they had broken into the voting counts and changed the actual voting numbers and literally changed the winner
    The former could be embarrassing but if they are only repeating the truth, generally I don't see a military response generally as justifiable. The latter could be considered an outright act of war!


    And I just don't understand why people don't care what the Russian's actually did and just whine that they did "something" they shouldn't have. At the very least people would actually know what they are complaining about!!
    Last edited by Belthazor; August 26th, 2018 at 05:50 PM.

  20. #20
    Registered User

    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    2,204
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Republicans Refuse to Defend Us Against Foreign Attacks

    Quote Originally Posted by Belthazor View Post
    A very curious, if not a dangerous thought......
    It "doesn't matter" what their level of "meddling in US elections" our response should be the same???
    As far as the thread goes I'm just trying to get to "there should be a response" - currently not the republican's position. If you are in agreement with me then fine. You're welcome to explore the rest further if you like.

    Your position is that it is ok as long as the information was true. That's like saying it's ok that I robbed a bank because I used the money to buy food for the orphanage.
    "Real Boys Kiss Boys" -M.L.

 

 
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. A Man CAN Refuse Forced Fatherhood
    By Scarlett44 in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 59
    Last Post: March 11th, 2014, 03:15 PM
  2. For those who defend your beloved GOP
    By Ibelsd in forum Politics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: March 3rd, 2010, 10:42 PM
  3. Defend the Monster
    By Apokalupsis in forum Social Issues
    Replies: 107
    Last Post: January 2nd, 2006, 07:12 AM
  4. Personal Attacks Enforcement
    By Apokalupsis in forum Announcements
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: February 22nd, 2005, 02:33 PM
  5. Relious freedom to refuse medical treatment for children
    By tinkerbell in forum Philosophical Debates
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: August 15th, 2004, 03:28 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •