CNN has lost all credibility

[Steadmund Brand]

I hope not. and I actually doubt it -I think hes done.but your right-they should have cleared this crap up a long time ago!!!!

See Abby we can agree on things!!! I hope not as well, and it should have been cleared up LONG AGO

But I notice you didn't respond to my being a NY Yankees fan.. could it be we agree on more???

Steadmund Brand

[Abby Normal]

Taken way too long as FOX had been paying off on charges against him for years....but better late then never

but fear not.. someone will hire him....I give it 2-3 months till he is back on the air

Steadmund Brand

I hope not. and I actually doubt it -I think hes done.but your right-they should have cleared this crap up a long time ago!!!!

[Steadmund Brand]

Taken way too long as FOX had been paying off on charges against him for years....but better late then never

but fear not.. someone will hire him....I give it 2-3 months till he is back on the air

Steadmund Brand

[Abby Normal]

Id be remiss if I didn't mention that Fox has fired Bill O'Reilly.

If even a fraction of the charges against him have merit-then good riddance I say and good job to the Murdochs for finally trying to clear up their culture of sexual harassment. although its taken too long.

[Ginger]

Hi ginger and pcdunn
I see what your saying and point taken.

However, as a history major who has a fascination with the great figures in history, great men and women who did amazing things I'm so very impressed with ones who did it and were great leaders. Ones that exhibited great leadership and part of that is doing it while retaining high moral standards. For example leaders like the Roman general cincinatus, Alexander the Great, george Washington, Lincoln, FDR (and yes I know he probably had an affair), Winston Churchill.

Not all leaders need be scumbags, nor should we merely blow off there faults as being "human". Especially if those faults are pretty heinous. I think leaders should be held to higher standards.
But that's just me.

We're blessed when we have men of Churchill's calibre to lead us. How many of those are alive at any one time, though?

And I'm grown perhaps too cynical, and too willing to settle for adequate over excellent.

[Svensson]

Meanwhile, CNN are doing an excellent piece on the fact that Trump has congratulated Erdogan on his rigged election win:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/18/opinions/trump-congratulates-erdogan-opinion-ben-ghiat/index.html

Apparently he is in dire company here. No other western leader has congratulated him on his victory but other shady characters like Hamas have.

Then again, if this was part of the agreement that Flynn had struck as a Turkish Agent, then it suddenly all makes sense. Either that, or Trump is a buffoon who has a scary affinity towards dictators like Putin, Gaddafi or Saddam.

[Abby Normal]

Hi ginger and pcdunn
I see what your saying and point taken.

However, as a history major who has a fascination with the great figures in history, great men and women who did amazing things I'm so very impressed with ones who did it and were great leaders. Ones that exhibited great leadership and part of that is doing it while retaining high moral standards. For example leaders like the Roman general cincinatus, Alexander the Great, george Washington, Lincoln, FDR (and yes I know he probably had an affair), Winston Churchill.

Not all leaders need be scumbags, nor should we merely blow off there faults as being "human". Especially if those faults are pretty heinous. I think leaders should be held to higher standards.
But that's just me.

[Pcdunn]

You know, I think we sometimes forget that, like it or not, Presidents are merely men, humans who are, by definition, flawed and likely to sin or make mistakes.

Bill Clinton should not have had an affair within the White House, and then played games of semantics about it. But he did eventually apologize, and has spent his post-Oval Office career being involved in humantarian causes.

Richard Nixon shouldn't have given into his paranoia and kept extensive "enemies lists", but many say he was one of the best foreign policy Presidents of the 20th century.

I think people in general are a mix of good and evil, and shouldn't be labeled as exclusively one or the other, without looking at their whole career and accomplishments.

[Ginger]

When it comes to voting for president , I vote for who I think will make a better president. I voted for Bush. I voted for Obama. And I voted for the least worst candidate IMHO last time around.

My beef for the millionth time is the delusional party fanatics on either side.
I don't know, maybe I'm just pissed there is no political party that I can really believe in.

For what it's worth, I voted twice for Bill Clinton (but not during the same election, although considering the man's character issues that might have been ironically appropriate). I think to this day that he was an excellent president.

That being said, I'd never invite the man into my home, and if he *did* somehow get inside, I would certainly count the silver before he left.

I've never understood the emphasis that some people place on a president's personal morals. Of COUSE they don't think the rules should apply to them. That's the kind of man who wants to rule a country. We hire these guys to do the dirty work, to decide in many cases who lives and who dies, and then we're astonished when they turn out to have the morals of a viper.

[c.d.]

"But you don't seriously think all Republicans are evil??? Your kidding right?"

Actually no. I think the Dems are lying, self serving, hypocritical scum bags but I think the Republicans could possibly be evil spirits that have taken human form and I am only slightly exaggerating. About the Republicans I mean. I truly detest them.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

...and yes, the Clintons are sleazy.

c.d.

P.S. But I did vote for Hillary mainly because she was not Trump and not Republican.

Well I held my nose and voted for Trump mainly because he wasn't a Clinton. HAHA.

But you don't seriously think all Republicans are evil??? Your kidding right?

Full disclosure. I'm registered independent and agree strongly with some planks on both sides and disagree strongly with some planks on both sides. There is no party for me. When it comes to voting for president , I vote for who I think will make a better president. I voted for Bush. I voted for Obama. And I voted for the least worst candidate IMHO last time around.

My beef for the millionth time is the delusional party fanatics on either side.
I don't know, maybe I'm just pissed there is no political party that I can really believe in.

[c.d.]

...and yes, the Clintons are sleazy.

c.d.

P.S. But I did vote for Hillary mainly because she was not Trump and not Republican.

[c.d.]

Oh ok. Republican evil. Christianity evil. LOL!

Well you are almost there. Republicans evil definitely yes. As for Christians, the so called ones that make up the Republican party - that would be a big yes.

c.d.

[Abby Normal]

Abby,

It seems your hatred of the Clintons has blinded you to the fact that allegations are proof of nothing. They are simply allegations. Rape charges? Any evidence for that? No. Sexual abuse? Examples?

"Take off your partisan politics blinders and maybe you just might see the truth."

Agreed. You might want to follow your own advice.

Clintons = sleaze

Republicans = sleaze AND hypocrisy.

c.d.

Oh ok. Republican evil. Christianity evil. LOL!
But hey at least you can at least admit the clintons are sleazballs so I'll give you that!

[c.d.]

Sorry I forgot to add the Christians thing. It is because they are the most influential group in today's Republican party. I should have said so called Christians because most of them would not know Christianity if it flew up their ass.

c.d.