| Welcome to Perspectives. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2
| Clinton wore a $12,500 jacket while giving a speech about inequality | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 8 2016, 10:41 AM (1,179 Views) | |
| Drudge X | Jun 8 2016, 10:41 AM Post #1 |
|
HAHA.. even leftists are outrage. http://www.sfgate.com/living/article/Hillary-Clinton-7968441.php?cmpid=twitter-desktop |
| Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jun 8 2016, 12:59 PM Post #2 |
|
Listening to Hillary Clinton give a speech on inequality is like listening to Dick Cheney give a speech on the evils of torture. |
![]() |
|
| Drudge X | Jun 8 2016, 01:23 PM Post #3 |
|
So you are not voting for Clinton? |
| Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jun 8 2016, 01:25 PM Post #4 |
|
At this time, I do not expect that I will be voting for Hillary Clinton. |
![]() |
|
| coverpoint | Jun 8 2016, 01:26 PM Post #5 |
|
Wow. Sarah Palin's wardrobe-gate all over again, but this time from the right. At least SOS Clinton gives national speeches about income inequality. Mr. Trump's idea of income inequality is when one of his golfing buddies has a better set of clubs. |
![]() |
|
| Attaburnsinhell | Jun 8 2016, 01:31 PM Post #6 |
|
Next she'll have her subjects kiss her ring from Tiffanys |
![]() |
|
| clone | Jun 8 2016, 02:12 PM Post #7 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Yeah....she got $250,000 a whack giving speeches to Wall Street where I am sure income inequality was the driving theme...Liberalism is a mental disorder.... |
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| ringotuna | Jun 8 2016, 02:30 PM Post #8 |
|
It's not something my abuela would wear. |
| Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated. | |
![]() |
|
| Drudge X | Jun 8 2016, 03:35 PM Post #9 |
|
You are saying you may vote for her in November then? |
| Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind. | |
![]() |
|
| clone | Jun 8 2016, 09:17 PM Post #10 |
|
Director @ Center for Advanced Memetic Warfare
|
Op will fall in line like a good little status quo'er.... |
|
Only liberals can choose not to go down the road to widespread, systematic violence. | |
![]() |
|
| Ronin | Jun 8 2016, 09:22 PM Post #11 |
|
Is the idea here that a wealthy person should be disqualified from discussing income inequality? |
| The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. | |
![]() |
|
| Gizmolove | Jun 8 2016, 10:25 PM Post #12 |
|
Gizmolove
|
No, just by someone who started it, has no business lecturing people about how bad it is. |
| When it comes to lying, cheating, or stealing, consult your DNC or GOP handbook. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jun 8 2016, 10:32 PM Post #13 |
|
I am saying that at this time I do not expect to vote for Hillary Clinton. I'm not saying that I wouldn't, under any circumstances, vote for her. I am saying that right now, today, I just don't see it happening. |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jun 8 2016, 10:40 PM Post #14 |
|
Disqualified? Certainly not. But given that she has never even mentioned income inequality as a problem until Bernie Sanders brought it up. And given that her husband was instrumental in creating the economic environment that has helped stoke income inequality. And given that she and her husband have managed to parley their political careers into a 150 million dollar family fortune. And given that a significant portion of that family fortune was gained directly from the banking industry in the form of "fees" for relatively trivial tasks like talking for an hour, it's just a tad difficult to believe that her heart is really in it. I mean, sure, it's possible that she is actually very concerned about income inequality and she isn't looking to protect the financial industry from any significant changes in the economic environment. Sure, that's possible. But her $12,500 Armani jacket kind of undercuts that argument. |
![]() |
|
| jake58 | Jun 8 2016, 10:41 PM Post #15 |
|
No, the fact that this wealthy person has enabled and supported the current growing income disparity is the reason she should be disqualified from discussing it or ridiculed as she wears a $12,500 frock as the case may be. |
| That which can be asserted without evidence; can be dismissed without evidence- Christopher Hitchens | |
![]() |
|
| Drudge X | Jun 9 2016, 01:09 AM Post #16 |
|
Would you take lecture from Madonna about safe sex when she lives a promiscuous life? |
| Kate Steinle was separated from her family permanently but leftists didn't seem to mind. | |
![]() |
|
| Ronin | Jun 9 2016, 02:43 AM Post #17 |
|
Who better to talk about the inequity inherent within the system than a very wealthy person fully benefiting from it while running for a political office capable of supporting change? |
| The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. | |
![]() |
|
| Ronin | Jun 9 2016, 02:44 AM Post #18 |
|
The best people to discuss the dangers of addiction with are addicts... |
| The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. | |
![]() |
|
| Opinionated | Jun 9 2016, 07:25 AM Post #19 |
|
It just seems far more plausible that she is behaving like most politicians and just saying the words we want to hear with no real intention of doing anything about the problem she's describing. It's not like income inequality is hurting her or her family, after all. So why would she care? Because she just really, really empathizes with the poor? Hillary Clinton? Really? That stretches credulity. |
![]() |
|
| ringotuna | Jun 9 2016, 07:31 AM Post #20 |
|
Who paid for the coat? Was it a gift? Anybody know? |
| Ringoism: Never underestimate the advantages of being underestimated. | |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Op EDITORIALS: personal & political governance · Next Topic » |
- Pages:
- 1
- 2






8:45 PM Jul 10