Mock

They should be auditioning a horse's ass for the role.

But that would take them forever, since they would all be perfect for the part.

Wonder who's going to play Bill?

(07-30-2013, 01:07 PM)FAHQTOO Wrote: [ -> ]Wonder who's going to play Bill?

And Monica...

All that will be skipped I think it starts at 1998. Its really a campaign movie. Once its out and they see the reaction and the ratings they will use the info to see where they need to focus funds.

I heard that when Bill found out it was Diane Lane, he volunteered to play himself.

Or maybe that was play *with* himself.

(07-30-2013, 09:40 AM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]Diane Lane will be cast as Chillary....... Why not just have Jennifer Aniston play her, if they really want the hollywood propaganda machine at full bore.

Co-starring.............Paris Hilton as Chelsea Clinton.

(07-30-2013, 01:22 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: [ -> ]

(07-30-2013, 09:40 AM)Maggot Wrote: [ -> ]Diane Lane will be cast as Chillary....... Why not just have Jennifer Aniston play her, if they really want the hollywood propaganda machine at full bore.

Co-starring.............Paris Hilton as Chelsea Clinton.

You suck!!!

Hillary didn't look that bad when she was young actually.

Now unfortunately she is a less convincing female than Frank N Furter from the Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Yeah, a real looker back then...

In the words of John Lydon “two sides to every story!”

http://www.google.com/search?q=hillary+c...xUnNZBtuVE

Hillary has a real chance in 2016 and that's a cool story. Kids do sometimes hit the nail on the head -- not crafted at the art of bullshit yet.

I'd not vote for Hillary at this point.

Some of the Republicans totally missed the point in their thirst to attack her over Benghazi (hello Rand Paul) -- I cared much more about how she handled being held accountable for it (or tried not to be held accountable for it, even though it was under her charter) than I did about the fact that she and others didn't foresee how critical the request for extra formal security truly was to the safety to our diplomats in Libya. The latter, IMO, spoke less about her leadership abilities than the former. JMO.

Plus, her healthcare project during Bill's presidency was a big fail and I think her Russia "reset" was also a fail (though I agree with her positions and dealings with China and her assessments of Putin's objectives -- for the most part).

I don't have a great deal of faith in her ability to construct, consider and delegate key domestic and foreign policy at this point. Then again, I can only think of a handful of politicians who I think might be as capable or more effective, and a lot can happen over the next two years.

Barring serious health issues, I think Hillary will run in 2016.

I wonder what her gif will look like.

I like Hillary Clinton better than I do a lot of other politicians, but that's not saying much.

It was incompetent that threats made against diplomats in Libya weren't better investigated and addressed in advance. And, I think that some Republicans looked like assholes at the hearings when they made it a personal attack on her rather than a professional one.

I don't blame Clinton for defending herself against those personal attacks, but don't think she owned responsibility for her department not responding appropriately to advance warnings/requests -- the consequences were fatal. The measures she put forth after-the-fact to minimize the same type of security breaches from happening again at foreign embassies/consulates were good ones, IMO. But, what I perceived as defensiveness and evasiveness when questioned about the facts and her department's failures regarding Benghazi decreased my faith in her ability to be an effective world leader. I don't know if any other politician in the same situation would have handled it any better though.

IDK. Next year is gonna be an interesting one politically; curious to see which pols start campaigning and ramping up for a 2016 presidential nomination.

"Woman" missed the Mark!

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/04/1...ng-speech/

(04-12-2014, 05:56 AM)Carsman Wrote: [ -> ]"Woman" missed the Mark!

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2014/04/1...ng-speech/

The lady who tossed the shoe at Hillary claims that she is possessed by James Holmes, the joker-wannabe theater shooter. Seriously.

Authorities need to commit this woman before she attacks people at a public venue with something worse than a shoe, IMO.



In August of 2012, Alison Michelle Ernst ^ was removed from a courtroom in Colorado after interrupting Holmes's court appearance, saying she had evidence to exonerate the suspect.

After her outburst, Ernst filed a motion in court alleging that Holmes was "mind-controlled" by powerful conspirators.

"Holmes is an innocent man. James Holmes must be released to me asap [sic]. This is a huge conspiracy," Ernst's motion read, fingering a prominent businessman as the true mastermind of the attack. He is, she continued, "involved in with new world and a group of cabal evil worldwide crooks who want to control the world through false flag attacks akin to George Orwell 1984 [sic]."

The judge dismissed the motion and local media described the document as "bizarre." On what appears to be Ernst's personal website, she posts another court motion involving Holmes, this one a request for a restraining order against the confessed killer.

"James Holmes [is] entering my mind through subliminal messaging and causing me to be obsessed with him on a daily basis," she wrote in that document. She added that she is "facing imminent danger and bodily harm from defendant James Holmes," even though he was in custody at the time.

I'd be really pissed if it had been one Manolo in the wrong size. THAT's traumatic.