"Hillary Hospital" signs welcome Clinton to Hollywood

[USN_Hokie]

Why did you use the word "diagnose" in quotes as if I or someone else had used it? I'm not playing armchair doctor. I'm listening to the opinions of trained medical professionals. It seems you agree that she may have (serious) medical issues. In that case, the public has a right to know.

I used quotes because no self-respecting "trained medical professional" would attempt to give a diagnosis based solely on still pictures and short video clips with no access to patient medical records or patient input. It's difficult enough for doctors to diagnose people who are physically in front of them with the patient providing input and various tools to measure different vital functions. For someone to look at a picture or video clip and say with any kind of certainty "Oh yeah she has a brain injury" is completely ridiculous.

And if by "agree that she may have (serious) medical issues", you mean that while it's plausible for any 70 year old to have medical issues there's not actually any evidence that Clinton does then yes I agree. The word I'll highlight in that quote is "may". She may have some unknown health issues... just like Trump may have some as well. Should Trump's health be a focus too? He's the same age (a bit older actually) so it's certainly plausible right?

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

We don't need to "diagnose" her for it to be a concern. And yes, I don't think her doctors would say she was unhealthy if she was on her death bed.

[absolutvt03]

Why did you use the word "diagnose" in quotes as if I or someone else had used it? I'm not playing armchair doctor. I'm listening to the opinions of trained medical professionals. It seems you agree that she may have (serious) medical issues. In that case, the public has a right to know.

I used quotes because no self-respecting "trained medical professional" would attempt to give a diagnosis based solely on still pictures and short video clips with no access to patient medical records or patient input. It's difficult enough for doctors to diagnose people who are physically in front of them with the patient providing input and various tools to measure different vital functions. For someone to look at a picture or video clip and say with any kind of certainty "Oh yeah she has a brain injury" is completely ridiculous.

And if by "agree that she may have (serious) medical issues", you mean that while it's plausible for any 70 year old to have medical issues there's not actually any evidence that Clinton does then yes I agree. The word I'll highlight in that quote is "may". She may have some unknown health issues... just like Trump may have some as well. Should Trump's health be a focus too? He's the same age (a bit older actually) so it's certainly plausible right?

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

We don't need to "diagnose" her for it to be a concern. And yes, I don't think her doctors would say she was unhealthy if she was on her death bed.

But it's only a "concern" because certain people have "diagnosed" her. Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue. It's just conjecture and speculation fueled by people who have a vested interest in Clinton not winning the election.

Ok so if you don't believe her doctors then how exactly would she prove it to you? And do you believe Trump's doctor whose statement read more like a piece of North Korean propaganda than an actual medical report?

[RiverguyVT]

Saw this article earlier, figured you guys would enjoy it (while dismissing it and calling it a fringe source of course):

http://www.cnn.com/2016/08/22/politics/ ... index.html

First, the piece is obvious spin.
Second, they are on record vetting stories with the D party, so yes...that makes them a fringe source by definition. Don't imply here that CNN's issues are actually issues with UWS posters. That dog don't hunt.

Oh I'm not implying it. I'm flat out saying it. No matter what media source it is certain people here are going to dismiss it while believing plenty of conservative "fringe" sources. The idea that CNN and other major media outlets are "fringe" sources is something you only hear about from places like this board.

I'm offended by the Star of David on the building in the background

Isn't that Cedars-Sinai? Wouldn't that explain the Jewish connection?

Vetting stories with the D party makes them what they are. People here have nothing to do with it.

[RiverguyVT]

Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue.

...as long as one is willing to overlook the several people holding her up like a character from "Weekend at Bernie's...."

[absolutvt03]

Vetting stories with the D party makes them what they are. People here have nothing to do with it.

It certainly makes it easier to dismiss things instead of having to actually discuss them. Like I said, I only hear about how major media outlets are "fringe" sources when I'm on places like this. But it has nothing to do with the people here...

Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue.

...as long as one is willing to overlook the several people holding her up like a character from "Weekend at Bernie's...."

I didn't overlook it at all. As I already said:

For someone to look at a picture or video clip and say with any kind of certainty "Oh yeah she has a brain injury" is completely ridiculous.

Pointing to a picture of someone holding her arm or whatnot and trying to say that's conclusive evidence of a serious health issue is completely inane. People see what they want to see.

[RiverguyVT]

Vetting stories with the D party makes them what they are. People here have nothing to do with it.

It certainly makes it easier to dismiss things instead of having to actually discuss them. Like I said, I only hear about how major media outlets are "fringe" sources when I'm on places like this. But it has nothing to do with the people here...

Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue.

...as long as one is willing to overlook the several people holding her up like a character from "Weekend at Bernie's...."

I didn't overlook it at all. As I already said:

For someone to look at a picture or video clip and say with any kind of certainty "Oh yeah she has a brain injury" is completely ridiculous.

Pointing to a picture of someone holding her arm or whatnot and trying to say that's conclusive evidence of a serious health issue is completely inane. People see what they want to see.

You've convinced yourself.

[RiverguyVT]

LOL... "...no evidence of a health issue..."

http://www.chicksontheright.com/hillary ... mpaign=FED

Although my favorite continues to be Huma writing that Hillary is often confused.

Nothin to see here. Yay, team felony!

[awesome guy]

LOL... "...no evidence of a health issue..."

http://www.chicksontheright.com/hillary ... mpaign=FED

Although my favorite continues to be Huma writing that Hillary is often confused.

Nothin to see here. Yay, team felony!

The libtards love their feeble old goat. Bet they regret not challenging her now.

[absolutvt03]

You've convinced yourself.

If you've got some sort of compelling evidence that shows a major health issue I'm happy to see it. But you don't because it's all from conservative sources trying to interpret pictures and videos. I'm not the one that's convinced myself. I'm simply stating facts while you're dealing in conjecture and speculation.

LOL... "...no evidence of a health issue..."

http://www.chicksontheright.com/hillary ... mpaign=FED

Although my favorite continues to be Huma writing that Hillary is often confused.

Nothin to see here. Yay, team felony!

You realize you're proving my point for me right? Do I even need to say "fringe source"? Everything "proving" the health issue comes from conservative websites. To repeat:

Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue. It's just conjecture and speculation fueled by people who have a vested interest in Clinton not winning the election.

[awesome guy]

You've convinced yourself.

If you've got some sort of compelling evidence that shows a major health issue I'm happy to see it. But you don't because it's all from conservative sources trying to interpret pictures and videos. I'm not the one that's convinced myself. I'm simply stating facts while you're dealing in conjecture and speculation.

LOL... "...no evidence of a health issue..."

http://www.chicksontheright.com/hillary ... mpaign=FED

Although my favorite continues to be Huma writing that Hillary is often confused.

Nothin to see here. Yay, team felony!

You realize you're proving my point for me right? Do I even need to say "fringe source"? Everything "proving" the health issue comes from conservative websites. To repeat:

Like I said, there's no actual evidence of any major health issue. It's just conjecture and speculation fueled by people who have a vested interest in Clinton not winning the election.

Taking a break from my idiot-free message boarding for a moment to point out that you're crying "conjecture!" when that's the entire point of calling for her to release her health care records because there's a lot of signs of illness and she needs to release her records so the public can make an informed decision if she's fit enough for the office. I don't expect a reasonable response from you, just pointing out that you're crying that there's no medical diagnosis when that's exactly what others are asking for.

[absolutvt03]

Taking a break from my idiot-free message boarding for a moment to point out that you're crying "conjecture!" when that's the entire point of calling for her to release her health care records because there's a lot of signs of illness and she needs to release her records so the public can make an informed decision if she's fit enough for the office. I don't expect a reasonable response from you, just pointing out that you're crying that there's no medical diagnosis when that's exactly what others are asking for.

Already covered that, try to keep up:

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

[RiverguyVT]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

[awesome guy]

Taking a break from my idiot-free message boarding for a moment to point out that you're crying "conjecture!" when that's the entire point of calling for her to release her health care records because there's a lot of signs of illness and she needs to release her records so the public can make an informed decision if she's fit enough for the office. I don't expect a reasonable response from you, just pointing out that you're crying that there's no medical diagnosis when that's exactly what others are asking for.

Already covered that, try to keep up:

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

Blah, blah, blah. Every president in the modern era has been through this disclosure. Not surprised that you're perplexed why people are asking for disclosure from such a feeble and dishonest person.

[awesome guy]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

the things they're defensive about shows where the weakness is. Not just Hillary's health, but them nominating someone that has to nap before attending meetings.

[absolutvt03]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

I would say the same thing to you. You repeating things over and over don't make them true either. You and others analyzing pictures and trying to determine medical health from them does not make it a fact either. I'm saying the same thing over and over because you seem to be incapable of understanding or comprehending it.

[awesome guy]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

I would say the same thing to you. You repeating things over and over don't make them true either. You and others analyzing pictures and trying to determine medical health from them does not make it a fact either. I'm saying the same thing over and over because you seem to be incapable of understanding or comprehending it.

You keep repeating yourself because that's as far as your critical thinking skills can carry you.

[RiverguyVT]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

the things they're defensive about shows where the weakness is. Not just Hillary's health, but them nominating someone that has to nap before attending meetings.

And then to blast the "source", ...which is Huma via email! Sources don't get better than that. Their own darn nonexistent/deleted/recovered/lied about EMAILS!!!

Waiting for the "I never said that" inevitable retort

[absolutvt03]

Taking a break from my idiot-free message boarding for a moment to point out that you're crying "conjecture!" when that's the entire point of calling for her to release her health care records because there's a lot of signs of illness and she needs to release her records so the public can make an informed decision if she's fit enough for the office. I don't expect a reasonable response from you, just pointing out that you're crying that there's no medical diagnosis when that's exactly what others are asking for.

Already covered that, try to keep up:

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

Blah, blah, blah. Every president in the modern era has been through this disclosure. Not surprised that you're perplexed why people are asking for disclosure from such a feeble and dishonest person.

So to recap, you act like you want to discuss something and when I reply with a completely valid response, you ignore it and respond with "Blah blah blah". You answered zero of my questions. You say every president in the modern era has been through it... has every presidential candidate? Because that's what Clinton is right now. Almost every presidential candidate in the modern era has released his/her tax returns but I don't see you calling for Trump to do that (or release his health records). Why is that?

[awesome guy]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

the things they're defensive about shows where the weakness is. Not just Hillary's health, but them nominating someone that has to nap before attending meetings.

And then to blast the "source", ...which is Huma via email! Sources don't get better than that. Their own darn nonexistent/deleted/recovered/lied about EMAILS!!!

Waiting for the "I never said that" inevitable retort

yep, this is the part where even he can see that he lost so the argument turns to using dubious claims of grammar of him not "really" saying what he did and you "really" saying what you didn't. There's no fix for stupid.

[absolutvt03]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

the things they're defensive about shows where the weakness is. Not just Hillary's health, but them nominating someone that has to nap before attending meetings.

I'm not sure why naps are suddenly getting a bad rap. Naps are awesome! I am 100% pro-nap regardless of political party.

[awesome guy]

Taking a break from my idiot-free message boarding for a moment to point out that you're crying "conjecture!" when that's the entire point of calling for her to release her health care records because there's a lot of signs of illness and she needs to release her records so the public can make an informed decision if she's fit enough for the office. I don't expect a reasonable response from you, just pointing out that you're crying that there's no medical diagnosis when that's exactly what others are asking for.

Already covered that, try to keep up:

As far as "the public has a right to know", how exactly would that work? I'm fairly sure Clinton's doctor has said there's no major health issues. Is that not good enough? Are we going to assume that's a lie? If so then what would prove that there's not? A full release of all her medical records so that people can pick through it and pull out something not life-threatening or unrelated to mock (like say organ prolapse or a UTI or something from her past)? In other words, you say the public has a right to know which is fine but I don't know how you go about proving it without releasing a ton of unrelated extremely personal information (and even then I'm not sure it would convince some people). And if you do that for Clinton, is it not also fair to ask the same of Trump? I'm sure his medical records are being audited though so he wouldn't be able to release them.

Blah, blah, blah. Every president in the modern era has been through this disclosure. Not surprised that you're perplexed why people are asking for disclosure from such a feeble and dishonest person.

So to recap, you act like you want to discuss something and when I reply with a completely valid response, you ignore it and respond with "Blah blah blah". You answered zero of my questions. You say every president in the modern era has been through it... has every presidential candidate? Because that's what Clinton is right now. Almost every presidential candidate in the modern era has released his/her tax returns but I don't see you calling for Trump to do that (or release his health records). Why is that?

Do you really think your blithering response was valid? Blah, blah, blah is the appropriate response to your silliness. SMH at the grammar argument. "She's really a presidential candidate!". Yes, every candidate goes through that dumbass. Trump is under audit and stated he'll release his returns after the audit. That's an issue for simpletons like you to fuss over.

[RiverguyVT]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

I would say the same thing to you. You repeating things over and over don't make them true either. You and others analyzing pictures and trying to determine medical health from them does not make it a fact either. I'm saying the same thing over and over because you seem to be incapable of understanding or comprehending it.

Except... I'm citing two different Huma emails, and all you have is denial.

[absolutvt03]

Do you really think your blithering response was valid? Blah, blah, blah is the appropriate response to your silliness. SMH at the grammar argument. "She's really a presidential candidate!". Yes, every candidate goes through that dumbass. Trump is under audit and stated he'll release his returns after the audit. That's an issue for simpletons like you to fuss over.

There are absolutely zero "grammar arguments" in my response. At this point I'm not sure you even know what grammar means. Maybe you meant semantics? Either way, I was trying to clarify whether you were saying all Presidents or all presidential candidates. Since you say "every candidate goes through that" then we'll be seeing Trump's complete health records as well? And the audit thing is BS. It's an excuse/stall tactic and you eat it up because Trump's "your guy". You do the same thing you accuse others of when your candidate is involved. Since we're being insulting and dismissive I'll just say that Clinton's health records are "an issue for simpletons like you to fuss over".

[HokieFanDC]

I'm offended by the Star of David on the building in the background

Nice!

Nolan.......is triggered.....poor guy.

?

A Star of David....on a gold building....with the Hillary arrow pointing towards it. Don't pretend you aren't curled up in a ball under a table crying right now.

Maybe Will Smith and Tommy Lee Jones gave me the MIB flash light thingy, but I'm not following this one.

Your closeted fan club is hard to understand sometimes.

[awesome guy]

03absolute, you simply saying something over and over and over again does not make it so.
It is nothing but your own opinion. You say that you have already said something, like that is supposed to hold some weight. It didn't; still doesn't.

My source is not a bad source, it is directly from Hillary's top aide. It is one of the originally nonexistent,
then deleted, and rediscovered emails. The source is Hilary's innermost circle. Just like the "often confused" email (which frankly is most damning). I also like how you euphemise multiple people literally holding the woman up so to be able to stand, as lending an arm. LOL

She can't stand up without 3 people holding her up "weekend at bernies" style
Her own people remind her to take a nap
Her own people say she's often confused
She can't take stairs without pushes and pulls from multiple people

The question of health is an obvious good question, your steadfastness in denial notwithstanding.

And none of this even touches on her criminality.

I would say the same thing to you. You repeating things over and over don't make them true either. You and others analyzing pictures and trying to determine medical health from them does not make it a fact either. I'm saying the same thing over and over because you seem to be incapable of understanding or comprehending it.

Except... I'm citing two different Huma emails, and all you have is denial.

Waiting for the "oh yeah, why didn't you say that again, again, again, and again?!?!?!?!?" response. His Inspector Clouseau act has grown old and tiresome.