Skip to comments.
Hillary Clinton is a polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious...
FreeRepublic.com ^
| March 26, 2015
| Dan from Squirrel Hill
Posted on 03/26/2015 6:24:09 PM PDT by grundle
Edited on 03/26/2015 8:51:46 PM PDT by Admin Moderator.
[history]
Found on FR
Hillary Clinton is a polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over confident, secretive, out of touch candidate who represents the past, and will do anything to win.
Hillary Clinton is a polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over confident, secretive, out of touch candidate who represents the past, and will do anything to win.
And if you are wondering why I would say such a thing, here is the reason.
TOPICS: Miscellaneous
KEYWORDS: blog; hillaryclinton; opinion
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
To: dfwgator
Well that very mediocre guy did get a higher percentage of the Texas vote than Cruz in 2012...
21
posted on
03/26/2015 7:18:54 PM PDT
by
nascarnation
(Impeach, convict, deport)
To: grundle
And those are her good points!
22
posted on
03/26/2015 7:20:50 PM PDT
by
VTenigma
(The Democratic party is the party of the mathematically challenged)
To: grundle
How about “the treasonous Butcher of Benghazi”?
23
posted on
03/26/2015 7:27:27 PM PDT
by
BerryDingle
(I know how to deal with communists, I still wear their scars on my back from Hollywood-Ronald Reagan)
To: grundle
"Hillary Clinton is a polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over confident, secretive, out of touch candidate who represents the past, and will do anything to win."
To: grundle
You know, Hillary has been around many years. I always felt she was insincere and out of touch.. Of course, being in politics, one realizes that being ambitious is part of politics. And, one realizes that anyone with a strong personality is going to be polarizing, and accused of being disingenuous. One wonders why Hillary doesnt come out and say that being accused of being calculating and secretive can not be necessarily sexist. And, the people who formulated this list are trying to help her, they are doing her more harm than good because it adds to the belief that she is indeed, calculating, entitled, and, will do anything to win. She has to make clear that she believes that she is not over-confident or inevitable. She has to make clear that her actions regarding the Email server are not secretive and that it does not add to the argument that she represent the past, even though her past actions in Arkansas might indicate.
25
posted on
03/26/2015 7:29:36 PM PDT
by
BigEdLB
(We're experienceing the rule of a Roman Emperor, Barack I)
To: grundle
The very fact that this “directive” originated from Hillary’s campaign, is proof they believe the charges.
26
posted on
03/26/2015 9:00:12 PM PDT
by
G Larry
(Obama Hates America, Israel, Capitalism, Freedom, and Christianity.)
To: Admin Moderator; Real Cynic No More; Utilizer; grundle
And a Hat Tip to the Admin Moderator for correctly attributing the source of the pithy headline and comment!
And Thanks from all of us for all the (usually thankless) work you do!
27
posted on
03/26/2015 9:48:15 PM PDT
by
shibumi
("Vampire Outlaw of the Milky Way")
To: shibumi
And Thanks from all of us for all the (usually thankless) work you do! Why thank you, Shibumi. I try hard but so few recognize the effort I put into educating all those here. *grin*
28
posted on
03/26/2015 10:22:03 PM PDT
by
Utilizer
(Bacon A'kbar! - In world today are only peaceful people, and the muzlims trying to kill them)
To: grundle
Hillary Clinton is a polarizing, calculating, disingenuous, insincere, ambitious, inevitable, entitled, over confident, secretive, out of touch candidate who represents the past, and will do anything to win.And this is on a good day and considered her better qualities.
29
posted on
03/27/2015 4:26:48 AM PDT
by
Caipirabob
(Communists... Socialists... Democrats...Traitors... Who can tell the difference?)
To: shibumi; Admin Moderator; Utilizer; grundle
Yes, thank you admin moderator, very much!
To: Real Cynic No More; Admin Moderator
I came up with the title on my own, and I had not read Real Cynic No More’s comment in the other thread. I’m sure lots and lots of other people have also had the exact same idea. For you to accuse me of plagiarizing someone else is ridiculous.
31
posted on
03/27/2015 1:54:13 PM PDT
by
grundle
To: Real Cynic No More; Admin Moderator
32
posted on
03/27/2015 1:58:43 PM PDT
by
grundle
To: grundle; Real Cynic No More; Admin Moderator; humblegunner; Syncro
"For you to accuse me of plagiarizing someone else is ridiculous."
No Gooch, it's logical.
Pulled threads and pulled posts don't show on your posting history, but you and I and Admin and a few others (who I've pinged here) are aware of your long history of threads pulled and attribution corrected.
If anything, when someone sees a thread posted from your blog the first thing that comes to mind is "Where did he rip this off from?"
You've earned the "honor" from your repeated re-titling, re-hashing, re-blogging and playing fast and loose with copyright. (Case in point, Calvin and Hobbes.)
And if you're wondering who pointed the finger, it was me. I'm the one that hit abuse (twice) and called Admin's attention to this thread.
Now - go ahead and try to tell me where anything I've said here is wrong. Tell me those threads weren't repeatedly pulled. Tell me you haven't had threads pulled for plagiarism.
Anyone who wishes to see an example of what I'm talking about can click on this thread, right here. Please note that the whole text was excerpted from FreeRepublic to protect against copyright violations and if I'm not mistaken, you were suspended for the reason given on the thread header.
Indignation and self righteousness - you don't wear them well.
33
posted on
03/27/2015 6:54:17 PM PDT
by
shibumi
("Vampire Outlaw of the Milky Way")
To: shibumi
I never claimed to be the author of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoons.
Whenever I do copy text from another website, I always cite the link.
Investor's Business Daily also came up with the same idea that Real Cynic No More and I came up with. And I'm sure a lot of other peopel on the internet are also calling Hillary Clinton those 12 exact words and phrases:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3272686/posts
34
posted on
03/28/2015 1:41:06 AM PDT
by
grundle
To: grundle
Those are some mighty weak straw men you got there, Taint.
Copyright infringement and plagiarism are indeed two different things. The thread I linked is an example of one.
Please don’t suggest that you’ve never had a thread pulled for the other - the internet has a very long memory. It might take me a while, but you and I both know that there are examples of you doing *both*.
As for IBD, what are you suggesting? It couldn’t be the old canard of “everybody else does it!” now could it?
Here’s your basic problem - credibility. Or rather lack of it. You can’t go around for (literally) years trying to piggy back your blog’s hit rate on other people’s work without suffering some damage.
Face it, Gooch - you do very little that could be called “original” journalism, even by the low standards of the blogosphere. About the only thing you have to offer is a rather advanced case of OCD list making. There are dozens of FReepers who on a daily basis post far more insightful and extensive essays as thread comments in the spirit of synergy and sharing who don’t expect to get blog hits for it.
You wrote two sentences one of which was rhetorical. And you linked to an article from Daily Caller. Why didn’t you just post the Daily Caller article? Your “clever comment” could be Post #1 and nobody - myself included would say one thing about it. But no. You had to pretend that those two sentences deserved a link to your blog. And if you had done it that way, probably no one would have noticed that it was the same as another FReeper’s comment.
Any way you slice it, you’ve made your own bed and established your own reputation. And it’s not a good one.
35
posted on
03/28/2015 3:37:08 AM PDT
by
shibumi
("Vampire Outlaw of the Milky Way")
To: shibumi
To: shibumi
When I said that Investor's Business Daily wrote the same thing, I was not saying that anyone had plagiarized anyone. Instead, I was saying that it is perfectly reasonable to think that multiple, different people would independently come with the same idea. Investor's Business Daily, Real Cynic No More, and myself each came up with the idea on our own, and I'm sure that many other people have too.
Yes, some of the threads that I started here have indeed been deleted. But my blog posts still exist at my blog, and I always post a link to any source that I use.
37
posted on
03/28/2015 4:47:40 PM PDT
by
grundle
To: grundle
Dissemble all you wish.
It doesn’t change who or what you are.
38
posted on
03/28/2015 8:01:34 PM PDT
by
shibumi
("Vampire Outlaw of the Milky Way")
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-38 last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson