D
DeniseNY
Guest
I think it explains the intellectual blindness that is exhibited so often on this forum.
I think it explains the intellectual blindness that is exhibited so often on this forum.
Why, if it’s true? How much history do you know about the building of the WH? And many more people besides slaves were involved in the building of the WH.On a different note, I read that Bill O’Reilly was commenting on the line in Michelle Obama’s speech in which she mentioned that the White House was built by slaves, to which he felt compelled to say that the slaves were “well fed and had decent lodgings provided by the government.” What a ridiculous thing for O’Reilly to say.
Aren’t there general rules (or customs) about not going after children of current or previous presidents?Media won’t ask Chelsea Clinton about her father’s treatment of women
I got the feeling some speakers were distracted by the noise. They can hear people around the center better than we the remote viewers can. There were some people that stopped to wait for noise to die down. President Obama seemed to pause for some cheers but otherwise kept speaking . He seemed to understand the microphones were picking him up just fine. Not everyone seemed to understand that.Mr. Obama is a good speaker. He doesn’t constantly yell like Hilary does.
Only for Democrats. The point is they have asked Trump’s daughters about his attitude and relationships with women, and his daughters have no issue answering head on.Aren’t there general rules (or customs) about not going after children of current or previous presidents?
Are you sure about that? Has the media been known to go after the younger Barbara Bush, Jenna Bush Hager, or the children of any other presidents (other than the children that have taken political office)?Only for Democrats.
Maximilan Kolbe;14072313:
Not when they were under 18, I don’t think. That makes good sense.Only for Democrats. /QUOTE]
Are you sure about that? Has the media been known to go after the younger Barbara Bush, Jenna Bush Hager, or the children of any other presidents (other than the children that have taken political office)?
And don’t get hung up on that statement - it was made in reference to this election.
Folks are just asking why asking media has been told questions about her father’s treatment of women is not allowed with regards to Chelsea but not Ivanka or Tiffany.
I’ve been surprised that the media has not mentioned one word about Ivanka Trump’s FIL and the way he hired a prostitute to seduce his BIL, filmed the encounter, and then sent the tape to his sister, all in an effort to prevent them from testifying about him. Not really relevant to this election, but that doesn’t usually stop them from chewing over a juicy bone like this.Aren’t there general rules (or customs) about not going after children of current or previous presidents?
No, it’s not really relevant. But let’s maybe drag up all the old dirt on Roger Clinton and maybe Hugh and Tony Rodham, too. Oh, and let’s not forget Ed Mezvinsky.I’ve been surprised that the media has not mentioned one word about Ivanka Trump’s FIL and the way he hired a prostitute to seduce his BIL, filmed the encounter, and then sent the tape to his sister, all in an effort to prevent them from testifying about him. Not really relevant to this election, but that doesn’t usually stop them from chewing over a juicy bone like this.
I thought we can’t even talk about Bill clinton’s alleged rapes and how hillary persecuted his alleged rapists.No, it’s not really relevant. But let’s maybe drag up all the old dirt on Roger Clinton and maybe Hugh and Tony Rodham, too. Oh, and let’s not forget Ed Mezvinsky.
Different rules!I thought we can’t even talk about Bill clinton’s alleged rapes and how hillary persecuted his alleged rapists.
I suspect most people consider the husband and wife team to be fair game in how they live their lives.No, it’s not really relevant. But let’s maybe drag up all the old dirt on Roger Clinton and maybe Hugh and Tony Rodham, too. Oh, and let’s not forget Ed Mezvinsky.
So I assume the answer is noneThere aren’t too many Republicans who feel confident enough to talk to Rachel Maddow. Rand Paul learned his lesson.
I didn’t watch but I can only imagine the production as I have seen it before.The Dems as you said are all about appearance.They put on a good show ,beyond that they rarely follow through on their lofty promises.Somehow their base never seems to notice.Gotts wonder why that is.the whole evening was like a Hollywood production of how wonderful we all are and patting each other on the back. packed full of emotion.
everything sounded good, but was just a load of horse apples if you know what I mean. I was not impressed with Tim Kaine at all. Too bad he hooked up with Hillary. he looks like a good fall guy.
anyhow, these people are a joke.
His speech will be the greatest speech ever only until Hillary gives hers tonight. The truth is Obamas could’ve gotten on the podium last night , belched and farted, walked off and we would have people swooning today aboutv how brilliant his speech was. And brace yourself, we’re going to be hearing the same thing tomorrow about Hillary .
His speech will be the greatest speech ever only until Hillary gives hers tonight. The truth is Obamas could’ve gotten on the podium last night , belched and farted, walked off and we would have people swooning today aboutv how brilliant his speech was. And brace yourself, we’re going to be hearing the same thing tomorrow about Hillary .
As far as I can see your observations don’t seem to contradict my understanding of the rule about leaving the children of presidents alone. When George W. was running his twin daughters would have been 19 years old. For his second election they would have been 23. While there were plenty of people that disagreed with his politics I don’t recall his children being the target of political questions.Not when they were under 18, I don’t think. That makes good sense.