Who really killed our Ambassador to Libya?

[Phi for All]

No distraction! I'll just wait until after 11/6/12 to hear the "alas, woe is me", and the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

You're the epitome of a modern ultra-right-wing Republican.

[iNow]

You're the epitome of a modern ultra-right-wing Republican.

Including the fact that he self-identifies as a middle of the road centrist.

 

I guess that's what happens in a world where a president who is in reality slightly to the right of Ronald Reagan gets described as a socialist who is trying to change our entire way of life, though.

[Moontanman]

No distraction! I'll just wait until after 11/6/12 to hear the "alas, woe is me", and the wailing and gnashing of teeth.

 

At this point it is apparent that all that really matters is winning... winning by whatever means necessary, we can all stand here and call the other side pussy communists all we want. Facts talk bullshit walks and so far Mitt Romney has shown himself to be nothing more than a lying sack of steaming monkey shit. His running mate is a tea party activist, i mean seriously, is he trying to lose? It's no better than McCain getting Sarah Palin as his running mate.

 

It's like he is shooting himself in the foot, wailing and gnashing of teeth? have you considered how silly that is going to sound when Mitt Romney loses? More importantly if Mitt wins and he continues the current republican policy of trickle down voodoo economics are you gonna use an umbrella when it starts to rain piss or lift you head up and take it like a real republican who is proud of being pissed on and being told it's rain? ? ?

[rigney]

At this point it is apparent that all that really matters is winning... winning by whatever means necessary, we can all stand here and call the other side pussy communists all we want. Facts talk bullshit walks and so far Mitt Romney has shown himself to be nothing more than a lying sack of steaming monkey shit. His running mate is a tea party activist, i mean seriously, is he trying to lose? It's no better than McCain getting Sarah Palin as his running mate.

 

It's like he is shooting himself in the foot, wailing and gnashing of teeth? have you considered how silly that is going to sound when Mitt Romney loses? More importantly if Mitt wins and he continues the current republican policy of trickle down voodoo economics are you gonna use an umbrella when it starts to rain piss or lift you head up and take it like a real republican who is proud of being pissed on and being told it's rain? ? ?

The difference between us Moon is that I can handle another four years of Obama's preening, prancing and doing nothing should he win. But if he loses, you're gonna be heart broken.

[Phi for All]

The difference between us Moon is that I can handle another four years of Obama's preening, prancing and doing nothing should he win. But if he loses, you're gonna be heart broken.

It'd be easy for all of us to handle, especially if Obama gets a Congress that's not blocking every smart move. But Bush 2.0?! Yeah, breaks the heart.

[Moontanman]

The difference between us Moon is that I can handle another four years of Obama's preening, prancing and doing nothing should he win. But if he loses, you're gonna be heart broken.

 

 

Heart broken? Riiiight.... Can you handle being pissed on and thanking god for the rain? If Romney wins the republican party will yet again screw us all, I didn't cry when Bush2 won, but the pain of what he allowed to happen will be with me forever... Everyone knows the SOB had those jets flown into the world trade center so he could consolidate his power and destroy the basic freedoms of the american public... right?

[iNow]

I can handle another four years of Obama's preening, prancing and doing nothing should he win.

Except, he's done many things... not nothing. Lots of nice economic data at the following link:

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/consumer-comeback-2012-10

 

 

Also, from the president himself, just last night at the debate (and yes, the facts check out and are accurate):

 

I told the American people and I told you I would cut taxes for middle class families. And I did. I told you I’d cut taxes for small businesses, and I have.

 

I said that I’d end the war in Iraq, and I did. I said we’d refocus attention on those who actually attacked us on 9/11, and we have gone after Al Qaeda’s leadership like never before and Osama bin Laden is dead.

 

I said that we would put in place health care reform to make sure that insurance companies can’t jerk you around and if you don’t have health insurance, that you’d have a chance to get affordable insurance, and I have.

 

I committed that I would rein in the excesses of Wall Street, and we passed the toughest Wall Street reforms since the 1930s. We’ve created five million jobs, and gone from 800 jobs a month being lost, and we are making progress. We saved an auto industry that was on the brink of collapse.

 

Now, does that mean you’re not struggling? Absolutely not. A lot of us are. And that’s why the plan that I’ve put forward for manufacturing and education, and reducing our deficit in a sensible way, using the savings from ending wars, to rebuild America and putting people back to work. Making sure that we are controlling our own energy, but not only the energy of today, but also the energy of the future. All of those things will make a difference, so the point is the commitments I’ve made, I’ve kept.

 

More economic data here: http://economistsview.typepad.com/timduy/2012/10/buyers-remorse.html

[Moontanman]

Except, he's done many things... not nothing. Lots of nice economic data at the following link:

 

http://www.businessinsider.com/consumer-comeback-2012-10

 

 

Also, from the president himself, just last night at the debate (and yes, the facts check out and are accurate):

 

 

 

More economic data here: http://economistsview.typepad.com/timduy/2012/10/buyers-remorse.html

 

 

you liberals and your facts... so annoying...

[iNow]

Now, closer to the actual topic of this thread:

 

 

[John Cuthber]

The difference between us Moon is that I can handle another four years of Obama's preening, prancing and doing nothing should he win. But if he loses, you're gonna be heart broken.

In the mean time, you could answer the question.

[rigney]

In the mean time, you could answer the question.

What question? If you mean by chance that if the pronoun "I" were to be removed from his vocabulary, could this pompous ass make a full sentence? The answer is, no!

 

Heart broken? Riiiight.... Can you handle being pissed on and thanking god for the rain? If Romney wins the republican party will yet again screw us all, I didn't cry when Bush2 won, but the pain of what he allowed to happen will be with me forever... Everyone knows the SOB had those jets flown into the world trade center so he could consolidate his power and destroy the basic freedoms of the american public... right?

There are folks I'd expect to make such a statement Moon, but not a grass roots guy like you. Edited October 18, 2012 by rigney

[ydoaPs]

What are the points of contention? From my scanning the thread, it seems that rigney (as usual) has nothing but the falsehoods FOX pumps out.

[Moontanman]

There are folks I'd expect to make such a statement Moon, but not a grass roots guy like you.

 

 

So you are sarcasm impaired?

[Phi for All]

What question?

What are you accusing the Obama administration of with regards to the Benghazi Embassy incident, in clear, unequivocal terms?

 

 

If you mean by chance that if the pronoun "I" were to be removed from his vocabulary, could this pompous ass make a full sentence? The answer is, no!

What are you basing this on? All politicians are more or less expected to talk about what they're doing for us, so how can they do that without saying, "I did this" or "I'm very concerned" or "I was just informed"? This is just more evidence, imo, that you have built up such hatred for this man that you're completely unhinged when it comes to anything he does. He could suddenly balance the budget and help pioneer productive solar power and bring peace to the Middle East, but you'd be screaming about how much he's preening and strutting about it.

[ydoaPs]

What are you accusing the Obama administration of with regards to the Benghazi Embassy incident, in clear, unequivocal terms?

 

Yes, that's what I meant to ask.

[Moontanman]

I think it's worth noting that I see this "rank hatred" of Obama in many old white men of a certain generation... I get my hair cut in an old fashioned Barber Shop where older men sit and talk about issues while they wait to get their hair cut. I am blown away by the absolute dismissal of Obama, I know this is a conservative area, It's almost a forgone conclusion that Obama will not win my state but the open hostility toward Obama is weird and ask why and you get a hodge podge of conspiracy theories that are all demonstrably false but they don't care, I even hear the phrase "I can't believe they let a nigger into office" quite a bit too .

 

The political ads for Washington wanna be's center around how the republicans have blocked the "evil" plans of Obama and if it's a republican running against a democrat the main thrust is that republicans will stop Obama from pursuing his evil agenda so everyone who is a real american should vote republican...

 

They openly lie, I mean blatant lies, goofy crap no one with half a brain would accept as reality but they don't care the main thing is to get rid of Obama by any means... You can suggest anything you want about Obama as long as it's bad and it will be embraced like a breath of fresh air... Weird as snake suspenders to me...

 

Openly obstructionist candidates selling the idea that if they are elected they will hold government in a dead lock until Obama runs out of time in four years from now.

 

It's insanity on a widespread level, i have no idea how to combat it, Obama could shit gold and piss oil and they would still go after him...

[iNow]

"Only a Democrat could prevent a depression, end a war, get bin Laden and double the Dow then be told he can't run on his record." (LOLGOP)

 

Edited October 18, 2012 by iNow

[Phi for All]

I think it's highly manipulative to imply something bad without stating it unequivocally. It's a ploy used by the unscrupulous, knowing that people will fill in the details when none are supplied.

 

I really can't say whether rigney is doing this consciously or is just mimicking the tactics of his party and the right-wing pundits, but it leaves me feeling dirty whenever I see it happening. It's highly insidious since the culprits can hide behind the insinuations, claiming they never really made any claims, and knowing that gullible people will imagine the worst.

[John Cuthber]

What question? If you mean by chance that if the pronoun "I" were to be removed from his vocabulary, could this pompous ass make a full sentence? The answer is, no!

 

No, don't be silly. That isn't the question at all. It's you trying (as predicted) to distract attention from the issue of your false accusation.

 

The question I have already asked you twice and which you have failed to answer. the one where I said that I felt that it was impossible for you to answer it, so you would just keep flannelling.

The one you are trying to ignore because you know you have absolutely no way of answering it without contradicting yourself, lying or admitting that you were, at best, hopelessly wrong.

For Rigney's benefit (in case he claims he can't remember it from yesterday) here's my question again , for the third time.

OK Rigney, I will try again

 

Unless you are accusing someone of handing it out, there's no way I could smell the crap is there?

That's my point.

You are contradicting yourself.

 

So, lets get this straight

Exactly what crap are you saying is being handed out?

Who is doing it?

What evidence is there to back up your accusation (even if you insist that it's not an accusation)?

 

I predict a non-answer- go on- be a devil- prove me wrong and actually answer the questions.

Edited October 18, 2012 by John Cuthber

[rigney]

I think it's highly manipulative to imply something bad without stating it unequivocally. It's a ploy used by the unscrupulous, knowing that people will fill in the details when none are supplied.

 

I really can't say whether rigney is doing this consciously or is just mimicking the tactics of his party and the right-wing pundits, but it leaves me feeling dirty whenever I see it happening. It's highly insidious since the culprits can hide behind the insinuations, claiming they never really made any claims, and knowing that gullible people will imagine the worst.

Watching both FOX and CNN news I do feel a bit dirty at times. Especially when dignataries, especially our president tries to B.S. his way out of a tight spot. If a person can watch the entire video of Obama's address in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12th and not come away knowing that he was telling a damnable lie about the Benghazi attack during the latest debate, I feel sorry for them. If you are going to tell a lie, make it believable for Christ's sake. There is an old saying: If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull shit. This incident was just the latest in four years of his B.S. Edited October 18, 2012 by rigney

[John Cuthber]

OK Rigney, I will try again

 

Unless you are accusing someone of handing it out, there's no way I could smell the crap is there?

That's my point.

You are contradicting yourself.

 

So, lets get this straight

Exactly what crap are you saying is being handed out?

Who is doing it?

What evidence is there to back up your accusation (even if you insist that it's not an accusation)?

 

I predict a non-answer- go on- be a devil- prove me wrong and actually answer the questions.

[ydoaPs]

Watching both FOX and CNN news I do feel a bit dirty at times. Especially when dignataries, especially our president tries to B.S. his way out of a tight spot. If a person can watch the entire video of Obama's address in the Rose Garden on Sept. 12th and not come away knowing that he was telling a damnable lie about the Benghazi attack during the latest debate, I feel sorry for them. If you are going to tell a lie, make it believable for Christ's sake. There is an old saying: If you can’t dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with bull shit. This incident was just the latest in four years of his B.S.

 

What was his lie?

[John Cuthber]

Well, here's a copy of the speech we can look at while Rigney fails to answer the question again

 

And, if someone is going to point out any lies in it they might find this transcript helpful

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-libya

 

 

but I'd still like an answer to this

OK Rigney, I will try again

 

Unless you are accusing someone of handing it out, there's no way I could smell the crap is there?

That's my point.

You are contradicting yourself.

 

So, lets get this straight

Exactly what crap are you saying is being handed out?

Who is doing it?

What evidence is there to back up your accusation (even if you insist that it's not an accusation)?

 

I predict a non-answer- go on- be a devil- prove me wrong and actually answer the questions.

Edited October 18, 2012 by John Cuthber

[Phi for All]

And, if someone is going to point out any lies in it they might find this transcript helpful

There's nothing in that speech that could remotely be called a lie, and consequently nothing he said about calling Benghazi an act of terror during the debate could be called a lie either.

 

For those who get bored easily, here's the relevant part of the Rose Garden speech:

No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.

An "act of terror", "this terrible act". How much clearer do you need it to be, for Pete's sake?!

 

Think of it this way. If, a few days after the Rose Garden speech, it was found that the attack was made by escaped mental patients who got hold of some guns and incendiaries and thought they were attacking the home of Adolph Hitler, don't you think the president would have been chastised for prematurely calling it an act of terror? And if so, why is it not good enough to be called the truth now that we know it was?

[waitforufo]

What happened on 9/11/2012 is that an organized military strike took place on our embassy in Benghazi. This attack took place in the absence of any protest by local Libyans anywhere near our Benghazi embassy. This was known by the State department within 24 hours of the strike as was given in testimony in House hearings. With this knowledge UN ambassador Susan Rice went on weekend talk shows telling the American people that the our embassy was overrun by mob violence resulting from protests stemming from the Mohammad video. John Cuthber provides a video where President Obama links the Benghazi attack to disrespecting the religious beliefs of others and calls it a terrible act. Why make this linkage? On the anniversary of 9/11/2001 a military strike in the absence of protests takes place on our embassy and the President blames this military strike on mob violence? Then on September 25 the President goes before the UN and goes on and on about the Mohammad video and its linkage to the Benghazi embassy attack. But the State Department said they knew with 24 hour that there was no protest that turned to mob violence against our embassy.

 

If you don’t see a lie in the above you have cotton in your ears.

 

Tonight on John Stuarts show you can hear the President of the United States say “When four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.” Shocking. Not only that, it wasn’t just four Americans. Our ambassador was assassinated in a military strike on our embassy by al Qaeda linked terrorists on the anniversary of 9/11/2001. I think “not optimal” is a bit of an understatement.