Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 01 Apr '15 20:43
    "Official records filed late yesterday in Westchester County, New York reveal that an individual named Hillary Rodham Clinton has filed divorce from an individual named William Jefferson Clinton."

    http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/hillary-declares-2016-run-files-divorce/
  2. 01 Apr '15 20:48 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by JS357
    "Official records filed late yesterday in Westchester County, New York reveal that an individual named Hillary Rodham Clinton has filed divorce from an individual named William Jefferson Clinton."

    http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/hillary-declares-2016-run-files-divorce/
    What a disappointment to the many (usually conservative Christians in the
    Spirituality forum) men here who insist upon the 'sanctity of marriage'! (sarcasm)
    Why didn't Hillary just wait 'until death did her part (from Bill Clinton)'?
  3. Standard member vivify
    rain
    01 Apr '15 21:04
    April fools.
  4. 01 Apr '15 21:16
    Originally posted by vivify
    April fools.
    This story has appeared on more than one website (one of which
    seems rather reputable), thus making it less likely that it's just a joke.
    The Clintons also are known to have had differences for a long time.
  5. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    It's only business
    01 Apr '15 21:24
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    This story has appeared on more than one website (one of which
    seems rather reputable), thus making it less likely that it's just a joke.
    The Clintons also are known to have had differences for a long time.
    Though the news is still being developed, one thing is certain: This is an April Fools' prank. We hope you enjoyed the hoax, and we're sorry if we just caused you to spit out your coffee.
  6. 01 Apr '15 21:45 / 3 edits
    Originally posted by AThousandYoung
    Though the news is still being developed, one thing is certain: This is an April Fools' prank. We hope you enjoyed the hoax, and we're sorry if we just caused you to spit out your coffee.
    For the record, I first stumbled across this story from a source ('National Report' )
    different from the one cited by JS357. so I did *not* bother to read the
    story (including the words quoted by AThousandYoung) cited by JS357.
    Now that I have read the 'National Report' story more closely (I skimmed
    the top parts of it earlier), I can find some suspicious wording in it too.
    (Actually, 'National Report' is full of obviously satirical untrue stories.)

    I don't really care whether the Clintons are married or not. That's their
    personal issue, not my concern. In any case, I don't approve of Hillary Clinton
    politically, so I would not support her unless the realistic alternative were worse.

    What I do find funny (not in a good way) is the notion that a woman politician's
    appeal to voters should be significantly influenced by her marital status.
    In my view, it should not matter, and that's what most motivated my post.
  7. 01 Apr '15 23:28
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    This story has appeared on more than one website (one of which
    seems rather reputable), thus making it less likely that it's just a joke.
    The Clintons also are known to have had differences for a long time.
    yeh, as if there weren't other instances where the media picked up Onion articles and ran them as facts, even if it wasn't the first of april.


    hillary moved pass bill getting a blowjob. and thats when she was first lady. what do you think would a divorce do to her nowthat she wants to run for president? do you think either the democrats or the republicans will like her more without bill ? do you think anyone will give her a pity vote?

    don't be naive, that's a false story
  8. 01 Apr '15 23:44
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    yeh, as if there weren't other instances where the media picked up Onion articles and ran them as facts, even if it wasn't the first of april.

    hillary moved pass bill getting a blowjob. and thats when she was first lady. what do you think would a divorce do to her nowthat she wants to run for president? do you think either the democrats or the republican ...[text shortened]... ut bill ? do you think anyone will give her a pity vote?

    don't be naive, that's a false story
    I already had concluded that it's a false story before Zahlanzi's post.
    In my previous post, I just explained why I did not read the story linked by JS357.

    When I first stumbled across the story, Hillary Clinton's marital status was not
    nearly important enough to me for me to spend any time investigating whether
    it was true or not. I skimmed the top part and shrugged, 'So what?'
  9. 02 Apr '15 16:14
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    What I do find funny (not in a good way) is the notion that a woman politician'sappeal to voters should be significantly influenced by her marital status.In my view, it should not matter, and that's what most motivated my post.
    No. What motivated your post is that you fell for a pretty d*&#mned obvious April Fools' prank, and that just because it played to your (also pretty d@#^&mned obvious) prejudices.
  10. 02 Apr '15 18:36
    Originally posted by Shallow Blue
    No. What motivated your post is that you fell for a pretty d*&#mned obvious April Fools' prank, and that just because it played to your (also pretty d@#^&mned obvious) prejudices.
    Shallow Blue shows he's arrogant enough to presume he can read my mind.
    Shallow Blue also has wrongly accused me of lying without any proof of it.

    This may come as shocking news in this ethnocentric forum, but, in fact,
    the cited April Fools' custom is far from universal, and it was not practiced
    in the culture of my upbringing.

    By the way, I have noticed that Shallow Blue has been much too obstinately
    stupid to comprehend (though No1Marauder attempted to explain it to him)
    that anarchism is not the same as Shallow Blue's extremely crude misinterpretation
    of it. And that's not a joke.
  11. 07 Apr '15 19:19
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Shallow Blue shows...
    Shallow Blue also...
    ...that Shallow Blue has...
    Ah, Duchess64 has still Duchess64 not got rid of that Duchess64 intentionally annoying Duchess64, sophomoric Duchess64 habit of referring Duchess64 to other people Duchess64 by their handles instead of using pronouns, as civilised people do.

    By the way, if you want to discuss anarchism, you can do so in its own thread - and in a normal manner. I refuse to pretend to have a conversation with a debating club manual. Should you do so, your homework for the day is to meditate on the difference between theory and practice.
  12. Subscriber Suzianne
    Misfit Queen
    12 Apr '15 21:18
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    I don't really care whether the Clintons are married or not. That's their
    personal issue, not my concern. In any case, I don't approve of Hillary Clinton
    politically, so I would not support her unless the realistic alternative were worse.

    What I do find funny (not in a good way) is the notion that a woman politician's
    appeal to voters should be si ...[text shortened]... y her marital status.
    In my view, it should not matter, and that's what most motivated my post.
    Well, it's not going to happen. Imagine the political hay that could be made with a divorcee running for President. Yes, most American show a terrific disregard for priorities.
  13. 12 Apr '15 22:16 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by Suzianne
    Well, it's not going to happen. Imagine the political hay that could be made with a divorcee running for President.
    Yes, most American show a terrific disregard for priorities.
    "Imagine the political hay that could be made with a divorcee running for President."
    --Suzianne

    Ronald Reagan, a divorced man, was twice elected US President.
    There may be a 'double standard', however, against a divorced woman.

    In contrast to Americans' 'puritanical' public standards of sexual conduct,
    the French elected Francois Mitterrand as their president. During the 1974
    election (which he lost), Mitterrand had impregnated his mistress, Anne Pingeot
    (who was 27 years younger). She gave birth to their 'illegitimate' daughter.
    Mitterrand was then living with his wife, Danielle, *and* her lover, while his
    mistress lived nearby. After becoming president in 1981, Mitterrand preferred
    to spend his nights with his mistress rather than in his official residence, the
    Elysee Palace. As president, Mitterrand appointed another former mistress,
    Edith Cresson, prime minister of France. At times, as one may imagine, he
    found it rather awkward to keep all many the women in his life contented.
    I don't know of any evidence this made Mitterrand worse as a president of France.

    If I mentioned this as a widely accepted part of French culture, then I suspect
    that some of the extremely judgmental conservative American or British men
    (some of whom seem to want adultery to be a criminal offense) in the Spirituality
    forum would start raving again about 'moral depravity'--the French's or mine.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/dangerous-liaisons-why-the-french-still-do-it-in-style-1084545.html

    "Dangerous liaisons: Why the French still do it in style
    The latest sociologists' myth is that Frenchmen no longer have mistresses,
    they only have affairs"
    --Suzanne Lowry (2 April 1999)

    "The French were amazed and fascinated--rather than shocked--when
    (Francois Mitterrand) was publicly mourned by two families (my note: his
    wife's and his mistress's) when he died in 1996."
    --Suzanne Lowry
  14. Subscriber henjutsu
    InsectRightsAdvocate
    13 Apr '15 19:16
    Very similar to those junky tabloid gossip magazines found at US grocery stores. "Tom leaves Katie for Xenu," "Did John Travolta kick a dog?", "Nicholas Cage pulled over for driving two cars while under influence", various things that don't matter in any way at all. But the pattern has made its way into politics, since they are largely dependent on the clown media.