Turkey fans BOO during pre-match minute's silence for the victims of Paris attacks an

[Unregistered]

So there we have it. You do approve of our politicians abusing their power and using their positions to intimidate and take advantage of their subordinates, even go as far as sexual abuse. Try to put yourself in the shoes of 23 year old woman in her first real job, trying to find her way and the POTUS, her bosses ,bosses, bosses ,bosses ,bosses, boss is hitting on her. Do you really believe that was consensual?

If your daughter failed an exam in school and she was offered a chance to improve her grade. One catch, she just had to sleep with the professor. Is that consensual? She may really need the better grade and might be able to justify it to herself, but it's not consensual and it's no different than having a man that controls your destiny making passes at you.

You call yourself "the professor", is this a tactic that you employ? Perhaps how you met your wife?

You like to take the moral high ground, but you have just admitted that you would be okay with your daughter being forced to prostitute herself. Way to go DAD!

You can't have consensual relations when one party holds the others future in their hands.

When a coach asks a defender to line up in a wall and block a free kick blasted directly at them from 10 yards away, is that a consensual agreement? Perhaps, if the kid is a competitor and will do anything to win. If the kid does it because he feels pressured to do so or risk being benched, it is no longer consensual.

No different than a sitting President asking a very young female subordinate to come for a private tour of the Oval office. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he understood the pressure she was under to resist him. He took advantage of her predicament.

[Unregistered]

Consensual. No way a 22-year old intern could possibly feel any pressure from a president.

"Honey, how come my cigars smell like tuna?" Larry cries out from the basement.

[Unregistered]

Consensual. No way a 22-year old intern could possibly feel any pressure from a president.

"Honey, how come my cigars smell like tuna?" Larry cries out from the basement.

Anybody making a list of Larrys considerable faults?

1. Terrible prognosticator - wrong on everything.
2. Unable to win any argument - must always throw race card.
3. Admitted pedophile.
4. Favorable view of sexual predators.
....just a start....

[Unregistered]

Gonna chip away from before day 1 just like the cons did with BO. Besides your boy trump is SO thin skinned that we can never tell what little tiny straw will break him.

He cannot even rise above SNL.

You hear trumps going to be exec producer of new season of apprentice and get paid for each episode that airs.

Hear he is going to retain ownership in businesses?

So excuse us while we see that the same scrutiny is applied as for say ....Clinton foundation

I wonder how the people losing their jobs T carrier feel today after he showed up there and acted like ALL jobs stayed

Next year is gonna be as fun for bashing as you had in 4. Such a target rich environment . So fun .

Larry, Trump has gotten more accomplished in 30 days than Obama has in 4 years. Historic incompetence and arrogance. A horrible combination.

When Trump coerces huge dollars from foreign governments for his personal foundation, let us know.

I wonder why the Clinton foundation donations have dried up? I thought they were doing "great work". Really strange that once her influence was negated by losing, people stopped donating. Really puzzling.

[Unregistered]

You can't have consensual relations when one party holds the others future in their hands.

When a coach asks a defender to line up in a wall and block a free kick blasted directly at them from 10 yards away, is that a consensual agreement? Perhaps, if the kid is a competitor and will do anything to win. If the kid does it because he feels pressured to do so or risk being benched, it is no longer consensual.

No different than a sitting President asking a very young female subordinate to come for a private tour of the Oval office. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he understood the pressure she was under to resist him. He took advantage of her predicament.

I guess trump NEVER had the future of ANY of those women who he pussy grabbed at his disposal. He grabbed gals at hisboagaent for god sake.

Tortured logic you gotnthere buddy. It's simple. He grabbed their pussies nomconsensually like he said you don't have to wait can do whatever he wants

Showing the fact your moral judgment is under partisan control. What an a z z

[Unregistered]

Why look here same point I made yesterday where ex lax ran around avoiding questions

Trump stimulus a problem for former free market republicans ....

Tee hee

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/1...timulus-232387

What DOES the GOP stand for other than ******* off non-nutters

[Unregistered]

In an opinion article published this week, the communications director for Hillary Clinton’s campaign – Jennifer Palmieri – highlighted a small electoral victory that ironically captured the reason for my party’s ultimate defeat. “As I like to note, Clinton received more votes for president than any white man in history,” she crowed.

Got it. White men bad, women good.

In Palmieri’s political world, she believes that we can cruise to electoral dominance if we build a coalition of voters based on identity politics. In other words, if Democrats can get a particular slice of Americans to the polls – women, Jews, ethnic minorities, gay men and lesbians – we will win.

The idea for this dates back most famously to 2004 when political experts John Judis and Ruy Teixeira published their book, “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They convinced my party that hard data – demographic, geographic, economic, and political data – forecasted the dawn of a new progressive era.

They argued that there was a massive wave of Democratic voters in the country’s urban areas just waiting to support the party, and would do so for generations to come.

In short, we couldn’t lose. We just needed to better organize these various categories of people and inspire them to show up on Election Day.

Unfortunately for my fellow Democrats – and the country – these political experts made a series of bad assumptions that has proven disastrous.

First, they assumed that each category of people was largely homogenous. For instance, people like Palmieri would make the case that all gay men are basically the same.

Next, the experts came up with policy solutions and related messaging to cater to a category’s specific needs. Again, gay men would likely respond to increased funding for HIV/AIDS research, so that’s what was pushed in gay-friendly media outlets.

With those two pieces in the bag, the actual candidate running for office was important but not terribly so, provided that she or he stuck to the script. And so that was our approach taken in 2016; Clinton was anointed as our nominee. Voters didn’t need to like her.

Pre-election polls seemed to support this strategy. The liberal Huffington Post put her chances of winning at 98 percent. My friends in the Democratic National Committee started jockeying for positions at the White House last summer.

And then, on November 9, America woke up to President-elect Donald Trump.

As a shell-shocked campaign and party struggled for answers – coming up with a litany of excuses – they missed the obvious: successful campaigns are built on candidates first, policies second, and coalitions of voters last. We had it completely backwards.

I will offer up myself as an example. By all measures in Palmieri’s playbook, I should have pulled the lever for Hillary Clinton. I’m a Democrat and voted for President Obama twice. I’ve got a college education and, for years, I lived in big cities. I support renewable energy instead of foreign oil. I’m also gay and have faced discrimination throughout my life.

Slam dunk for Team Clinton? Not so fast.

I was – and remain – appalled at her vote in Iraq that sent 4,491 servicemen and women to their deaths.

Equally egregious, she bragged about killing Libya’s dictator despite him no longer being a threat to our country. The result of that fiasco? Dead soldiers and Ambassador in Benghazi, a new safe haven for the Islamic State, and a refugee crisis that threatens Europe’s stability to this day.

In sum, she pushed for wars without reason; she lacked the judgment to be commander in chief.

To the horror of my party, it turns out that I think critically. I do not follow the party line. Moreover, the Clinton campaign profoundly misunderstood my identity. I am an American first, a family man second, and a Democrat third. My sexual orientation is deeply important but it does not dictate how I vote.

After wrestling with what to do on Election Day, I decided on Gary Johnson; I couldn’t stomach Clinton and didn’t trust Trump. In fact, I still don’t. But the American people chose differently. Whether I like it or not, Donald Trump will be the president of the United States in just over a month.

It is now my solemn duty to follow the example I learned at the Central Intelligence Agency: salute my flag and commander in chief irrespective of my party affiliation, all while staying true to those Democratic values that I hold dear.

I will not whine or protest. I will not demand a recount. Instead, I will encourage people to support President Trump as their conscience allows, and oppose him respectfully and fairly where they cannot. We owe him the chance to succeed. That’s how adults behave in a democracy.

To Palmieri and Democrats who think like her, I urge our party to reconsider our embrace of identity politics. Most Americans simply do not care that Secretary Clinton won more votes than any other white man. It’s an offensive and intellectually lazy argument to make.

We will not be falsely divided into a nation of neat categories. If you cannot accept that, then please go away. And take your fellow ideologues with you.

If, however, you can accept this new direction, we can once again make our case to the American people – white, black, and brown; gay and straight; Christian and Muslim; rural and urban – that we are a party worthy of their vote.

The country deserves a faithful opposition, and that requires a credible voice to hold Trump accountable. Unless we ditch identity politics and stop whining, we will not be taken seriously. Instead, we will be stuck at the edge of an electoral abyss.

/////

I cannot confirm this, but pretty certain this writer had Larry's incoherent hateful ramblings on his screen when he wrote this as a reply.

This is how adults behave, Larry.

[Unregistered]

I guess trump NEVER had the future of ANY of those women who he pussy grabbed at his disposal. He grabbed gals at hisboagaent for god sake.

Tortured logic you gotnthere buddy. It's simple. He grabbed their pussies nomconsensually like he said you don't have to wait can do whatever he wants

Showing the fact your moral judgment is under partisan control. What an a z z

You like to throw this "pussy grab" thing around like it's your pussy that he grabbed.
Please provide the name and circumstances of one woman whose pussy he grabbed. I'm not asking you to detail any time he may have hit on somebody, looking for an instance of an actual "pussy grab".

I heard a jack ass making a boastful exaggerated comment to Billy Bush. If you have proof that he actually carried out his claims, then let's hear it.

Btw- Thete is proof of Clintons perversions. First hand accounts.

What Trump was doing as a private citizen is his business and that of the legal system. When a sitting President is behaving like a frat boy, then that concerns me and it should concern you.
He brought a tremendous amount of shame to the office and removed the aura of respect for all future Presidents both at home and abroad. Given your support for HRC, evidently you approve of his actions.

[Unregistered]

In an opinion article published this week, the communications director for Hillary Clinton’s campaign – Jennifer Palmieri – highlighted a small electoral victory that ironically captured the reason for my party’s ultimate defeat. “As I like to note, Clinton received more votes for president than any white man in history,” she crowed.

Got it. White men bad, women good.

In Palmieri’s political world, she believes that we can cruise to electoral dominance if we build a coalition of voters based on identity politics. In other words, if Democrats can get a particular slice of Americans to the polls – women, Jews, ethnic minorities, gay men and lesbians – we will win.
P
The idea for this dates back most famously to 2004 when political experts John Judis and Ruy Teixeira published their book, “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They convinced my party that hard data – demographic, geographic, economic, and political data – forecasted the dawn of a new progressive era.

They argued that there was a massive wave of Democratic voters in the country’s urban areas just waiting to support the party, and would do so for generations to come.

In short, we couldn’t lose. We just needed to better organize these various categories of people and inspire them to show up on Election Day.

Unfortunately for my fellow Democrats – and the country – these political experts made a series of bad assumptions that has proven disastrous.

First, they assumed that each category of people was largely homogenous. For instance, people like Palmieri would make the case that all gay men are basically the same.

Next, the experts came up with policy solutions and related messaging to cater to a category’s specific needs. Again, gay men would likely respond to increased funding for HIV/AIDS research, so that’s what was pushed in gay-friendly media outlets.

With those two pieces in the bag, the actual candidate running for office was important but not terribly so, provided that she or he stuck to the script. And so that was our approach taken in 2016; Clinton was anointed as our nominee. Voters didn’t need to like her.

Pre-election polls seemed to support this strategy. The liberal Huffington Post put her chances of winning at 98 percent. My friends in the Democratic National Committee started jockeying for positions at the White House last summer.

And then, on November 9, America woke up to President-elect Donald Trump.

As a shell-shocked campaign and party struggled for answers – coming up with a litany of excuses – they missed the obvious: successful campaigns are built on candidates first, policies second, and coalitions of voters last. We had it completely backwards.

I will offer up myself as an example. By all measures in Palmieri’s playbook, I should have pulled the lever for Hillary Clinton. I’m a Democrat and voted for President Obama twice. I’ve got a college education and, for years, I lived in big cities. I support renewable energy instead of foreign oil. I’m also gay and have faced discrimination throughout my life.

Slam dunk for Team Clinton? Not so fast.

I was – and remain – appalled at her vote in Iraq that sent 4,491 servicemen and women to their deaths.

Equally egregious, she bragged about killing Libya’s dictator despite him no longer being a threat to our country. The result of that fiasco? Dead soldiers and Ambassador in Benghazi, a new safe haven for the Islamic State, and a refugee crisis that threatens Europe’s stability to this day.

In sum, she pushed for wars without reason; she lacked the judgment to be commander in chief.

To the horror of my party, it turns out that I think critically. I do not follow the party line. Moreover, the Clinton campaign profoundly misunderstood my identity. I am an American first, a family man second, and a Democrat third. My sexual orientation is deeply important but it does not dictate how I vote.

After wrestling with what to do on Election Day, I decided on Gary Johnson; I couldn’t stomach Clinton and didn’t trust Trump. In fact, I still don’t. But the American people chose differently. Whether I like it or not, Donald Trump will be the president of the United States in just over a month.

It is now my solemn duty to follow the example I learned at the Central Intelligence Agency: salute my flag and commander in chief irrespective of my party affiliation, all while staying true to those Democratic values that I hold dear.

I will not whine or protest. I will not demand a recount. Instead, I will encourage people to support President Trump as their conscience allows, and oppose him respectfully and fairly where they cannot. We owe him the chance to succeed. That’s how adults behave in a democracy.

To Palmieri and Democrats who think like her, I urge our party to reconsider our embrace of identity politics. Most Americans simply do not care that Secretary Clinton won more votes than any other white man. It’s an offensive and intellectually lazy argument to make.

We will not be falsely divided into a nation of neat categories. If you cannot accept that, then please go away. And take your fellow ideologues with you.

If, however, you can accept this new direction, we can once again make our case to the American people – white, black, and brown; gay and straight; Christian and Muslim; rural and urban – that we are a party worthy of their vote.

The country deserves a faithful opposition, and that requires a credible voice to hold Trump accountable. Unless we ditch identity politics and stop whining, we will not be taken seriously. Instead, we will be stuck at the edge of an electoral abyss.

/////

I cannot confirm this, but pretty certain this writer had Larry's incoherent hateful ramblings on his screen when he wrote this as a reply.

This is how adults behave, Larry.

Larry will shrug these comments off and call this patriot a racist.

[Unregistered]

Ex lax your posts are waaaayyyy too long to read. (I'm sure you remember that blast from the past) lots of evasive words and gobbledygook rather than speaking clearly and plainly

Like this

Just as President Barack Obama has enjoyed regular rounds of golf during his eight years in office, Donald Trump’s senior adviser Kellyanne Conway said Friday morning that the president-elect should be allowed to pursue his own hobby — “work” — by remaining an executive producer on his reality TV show while in the White House.

We've heard you over and over about Obama so please ...

1) attack attack attack trump for spending time on his hobby ....moreso ....obomas weekly golf didn't line his pockets to the tune of hundreds of thousands

Or

2) HYPOCRISY

We already know your flavor I think

Lol this is soooooo easy ...on your heels my little b I t c h

[Unregistered]

Oh so pussy grabbing as a private citizen is one's own business according to cons. It's all fine.

He's been accused of rape. President rapist.

Awesome

[Unregistered]

Ex lax your posts are waaaayyyy too long to read. (I'm sure you remember that blast from the past) lots of evasive words and gobbledygook rather than speaking clearly and plainly

Like this



We've heard you over and over about Obama so please ...

1) attack attack attack trump for spending time on his hobby ....moreso ....obomas weekly golf didn't line his pockets to the tune of hundreds of thousands

Or

2) HYPOCRISY

We already know your flavor I think

Lol this is soooooo easy ...on your heels my little b I t c h

I know it's difficult for you, all that proper grammar and punctuation you can't handle. That's why I bolded some statements that apply directly to you.

But, as it your mantra, when your own party considers you a fool...you just can't seem to read that much and go on the attack again.

Your gripe is with your fellow dems. Why don't you get on the same page with them, then come attacking everyone else.

How's your stinky cigar today?

[Unregistered]

It is now my solemn duty to follow the example I learned at the Central Intelligence Agency: salute my flag and commander in chief irrespective of my party affiliation, all while staying true to those Democratic values that I hold dear.

I will not whine or protest. I will not demand a recount. Instead, I will encourage people to support President Trump as their conscience allows, and oppose him respectfully and fairly where they cannot. We owe him the chance to succeed. That’s how adults behave in a democracy.

A
D
U
L
T
S

[Unregistered]

Oh so pussy grabbing as a private citizen is one's own business according to cons. It's all fine.

He's been accused of rape. President rapist.

Awesome

I guess you can't come up with any instances of "pussy grab"? So your repeated referrals to such are just false accusations.
Keep throwing stuff out there, Larry. Sooner or later you will get something right, nobody can be wrong 100% of the time, not even you. As of now you're batting zero!
Hope there is a carbon monoxide detector in that locker you are stuffed in.

[Unregistered]

In an opinion article published this week, the communications director for Hillary Clinton’s campaign – Jennifer Palmieri – highlighted a small electoral victory that ironically captured the reason for my party’s ultimate defeat. “As I like to note, Clinton received more votes for president than any white man in history,” she crowed.

Got it. White men bad, women good.

In Palmieri’s political world, she believes that we can cruise to electoral dominance if we build a coalition of voters based on identity politics. In other words, if Democrats can get a particular slice of Americans to the polls – women, Jews, ethnic minorities, gay men and lesbians – we will win.

The idea for this dates back most famously to 2004 when political experts John Judis and Ruy Teixeira published their book, “The Emerging Democratic Majority.” They convinced my party that hard data – demographic, geographic, economic, and political data – forecasted the dawn of a new progressive era.

They argued that there was a massive wave of Democratic voters in the country’s urban areas just waiting to support the party, and would do so for generations to come.

In short, we couldn’t lose. We just needed to better organize these various categories of people and inspire them to show up on Election Day.

Unfortunately for my fellow Democrats – and the country – these political experts made a series of bad assumptions that has proven disastrous.

First, they assumed that each category of people was largely homogenous. For instance, people like Palmieri would make the case that all gay men are basically the same.

Next, the experts came up with policy solutions and related messaging to cater to a category’s specific needs. Again, gay men would likely respond to increased funding for HIV/AIDS research, so that’s what was pushed in gay-friendly media outlets.

With those two pieces in the bag, the actual candidate running for office was important but not terribly so, provided that she or he stuck to the script. And so that was our approach taken in 2016; Clinton was anointed as our nominee. Voters didn’t need to like her.

Pre-election polls seemed to support this strategy. The liberal Huffington Post put her chances of winning at 98 percent. My friends in the Democratic National Committee started jockeying for positions at the White House last summer.

And then, on November 9, America woke up to President-elect Donald Trump.

As a shell-shocked campaign and party struggled for answers – coming up with a litany of excuses – they missed the obvious: successful campaigns are built on candidates first, policies second, and coalitions of voters last. We had it completely backwards.

I will offer up myself as an example. By all measures in Palmieri’s playbook, I should have pulled the lever for Hillary Clinton. I’m a Democrat and voted for President Obama twice. I’ve got a college education and, for years, I lived in big cities. I support renewable energy instead of foreign oil. I’m also gay and have faced discrimination throughout my life.

Slam dunk for Team Clinton? Not so fast.

I was – and remain – appalled at her vote in Iraq that sent 4,491 servicemen and women to their deaths.

Equally egregious, she bragged about killing Libya’s dictator despite him no longer being a threat to our country. The result of that fiasco? Dead soldiers and Ambassador in Benghazi, a new safe haven for the Islamic State, and a refugee crisis that threatens Europe’s stability to this day.

In sum, she pushed for wars without reason; she lacked the judgment to be commander in chief.

To the horror of my party, it turns out that I think critically. I do not follow the party line. Moreover, the Clinton campaign profoundly misunderstood my identity. I am an American first, a family man second, and a Democrat third. My sexual orientation is deeply important but it does not dictate how I vote.

After wrestling with what to do on Election Day, I decided on Gary Johnson; I couldn’t stomach Clinton and didn’t trust Trump. In fact, I still don’t. But the American people chose differently. Whether I like it or not, Donald Trump will be the president of the United States in just over a month.

It is now my solemn duty to follow the example I learned at the Central Intelligence Agency: salute my flag and commander in chief irrespective of my party affiliation, all while staying true to those Democratic values that I hold dear.

I will not whine or protest. I will not demand a recount. Instead, I will encourage people to support President Trump as their conscience allows, and oppose him respectfully and fairly where they cannot. We owe him the chance to succeed. That’s how adults behave in a democracy.

To Palmieri and Democrats who think like her, I urge our party to reconsider our embrace of identity politics. Most Americans simply do not care that Secretary Clinton won more votes than any other white man. It’s an offensive and intellectually lazy argument to make.

We will not be falsely divided into a nation of neat categories. If you cannot accept that, then please go away. And take your fellow ideologues with you.

If, however, you can accept this new direction, we can once again make our case to the American people – white, black, and brown; gay and straight; Christian and Muslim; rural and urban – that we are a party worthy of their vote.

The country deserves a faithful opposition, and that requires a credible voice to hold Trump accountable. Unless we ditch identity politics and stop whining, we will not be taken seriously. Instead, we will be stuck at the edge of an electoral abyss.

/////

I cannot confirm this, but pretty certain this writer had Larry's incoherent hateful ramblings on his screen when he wrote this as a reply.

This is how adults behave, Larry.

People with jobs just do not have time to read your lengthy incoherent ramblings. Sorry