Benghazi... After today's revalations...

[Echonova]

So who will be the first scape goat sacrificed? I'm guessing Hillary.


Or do you not believe the documents released by our Government because they were only reported on by Fox News... Or "Faux News" as you liberals like to call them.



Discuss. I need hilarity today.

[Elbow]

GO BRAVES!

[l Gizzy l]

synopsis?

[Echonova]

synopsis?Seriously...




It's too long to type and even if I did you wouldn't read it.

[l Gizzy l]

Seriously...

It's too long to type and even if I did you wouldn't read it.

google it is!

Been at work all day.

[.blank cd]

Link?

[BanginJimmy]

EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/)

[.blank cd]

Bullshit Filter Mode:

OFF [ ON ]

I'm goin in....

[fatty]

EXCLUSIVE: CIA operators were denied request for help during Benghazi attack, sources say | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/10/26/cia-operators-were-denied-request-for-help-during-benghazi-attack-sources-say/)

not just fox news but cnn confirmed it too. just to show he was caught in his lie when even the liberal media stops covering your ass.

[BanginJimmy]

not just fox news but cnn confirmed it too. just to show he was caught in his lie when even the liberal media stops covering your ass.


If this actually hits the airwaves and the general public sees it Obama is done. His legacy will be no better than that of Nixon.

[bitchface]

Jimmy Carter is more like it.

[.blank cd]

Serious question: What do you believe Obama's role in this incident is?

[BanginJimmy]

Serious question: What do you believe Obama's role in this incident is?

That he was fully aware of and participated the planning and execution of the cover up. Basicly the same place as Nixon was in the Watergate cover up.


I dont believe he was made aware of the requests for additional security or for refusing additional support. I do believe Clinton and Panetta are criminally responsible for the 2 deaths at the Annex. There is no way 7 hours was not enough time to get air support or even a small security force into Benghazi.

In the end, Obama is still responsible because he is the top of the chain.

[Echonova]

Serious question: What do you believe Obama's role in this incident is?If Obama didn't know... A whole host of people need to be fired if not in jail. If Obama knew and didn't care, well that's another matter entirely. It's hard to believe a President could hear that a man he asked to serve as an Ambassador was under attack, ordered no support to be given and went to bed and attended a fund raiser the next day. Defies logic. But within 30 minutes of the panic button being pressed the advisor standing next to the President would have known. I'm inclined to believe he knew. These documents were just the non-classified redacted emails, there would have been (at least) two other layers of communication with one being IM's (military IM's are not like Yahoo messenger, receipt is acknowledged and logged) going through AFRICOM (4 star general and regional commander). Trigger authority would have gone to him if POTUS, VP etc down through the chain were unavailable.

They were told to stand down.


Sad part is, that even if these SEAL's had survived they would have been court-marshaled anyway.

[Echonova]

At that point, they called again for military support and help because they were taking fire at the CIA safe house, or annex. The request was denied. There were no communications problems at the annex, according those present at the compound. The team was in constant radio contact with their headquarters. In fact, at least one member of the team was on the roof of the annex manning a heavy machine gun when mortars were fired at the CIA compound. The security officer had a laser on the target that was firing and repeatedly requested back-up support from a Spectre gunship, which is commonly used by U.S. Special Operations forces to provide support to Special Operations teams on the ground involved in intense firefights. The fighting at the CIA annex went on for more than four hours — enough time for any planes based in Sigonella Air base, just 480 miles away, to arrive. Fox News has also learned that two separate Tier One Special operations forces were told to wait, among them Delta Force operators. ...

[.blank cd]

Hmmm. It's always interesting to figure out why people believe the things they believe.

[BanginJimmy]

Hmmm. It's always interesting to figure out why people believe the things they believe.

By this comment it sounds like you still believe it was a protest over a video that went crazy.

[Sinfix_15]

Serious question: What do you believe Obama's role in this incident is?

Obama not having a role in this incident is a failure in itself.

[l Gizzy l]

ruh roh.....

[Sinfix_15]

Ruh-roh: was General Ham ordered to #StandDown & relieved of his command when he tried to deploy forces to Benghazi? [Darleen Click] | protein wisdom (http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44819)

[.blank cd]

Ruh-roh: was General Ham ordered to #StandDown & relieved of his command when he tried to deploy forces to Benghazi? [Darleen Click] | protein wisdom (http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=44819)

FIRST GOD DAMN SENTENCE OF THE ARTICLE: "Rumor? Could be, but it sounds plausible enough"

WHY?? This is not news. This is bullshit circulated by a propaganda machine passed off as news, which is evidenced by the FIRST DAMN SENTENCE.

Dismissed.

[Sinfix_15]

FIRST GOD DAMN SENTENCE OF THE ARTICLE: "Rumor? Could be, but it sounds plausible enough"

WHY?? This is not news. This is bullshit circulated by a propaganda machine passed off as news, which is evidenced by the FIRST DAMN SENTENCE.

Dismissed.

You cant just read everything with the mindset of "quick, how can i dismiss this"

You dont know that this is "bullshit circulated by the propaganda machine".

Tell me where this story does not line up.

[.blank cd]

Tell me where this story does not line up."Rumor? Could be, but it sounds plausible enough"

[.blank cd]

They must also be the purveyors of this quality journalism

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sites/nationalenquirer.com/files/imagecache/node_page_image/article_images/cover_story_12.jpg

[Sinfix_15]

"Rumor? Could be, but it sounds plausible enough"

Ok, and what will you say when the rumors become testimonies?

WHAT IF...............?

Just curious, what is your explanation for these events? Tell me a scenario in which Obama would not be to blame?

[Echonova]

General Ham stepped down because his wife is terminally ill. Although he was in the Pentagon when the attack was underway, so he had to have been aware... His "stepping down" is not some elaborate Obama plot.

[.blank cd]

General Ham stepped down because his wife is terminally ill. Although he was in the Pentagon when the attack was underway, so he had to have been aware... His "stepping down" is not some elaborate Obama plot.

You mean to tell me everything that happens ISNT some masterful elaborate scheme to frame Obama? Then what did I make this tin foil hat for?

[Echonova]

You mean to tell me everything that happens ISNT some masterful elaborate scheme to frame Obama? Then what did I make this tin foil hat for?Everyone knows the tinfoil blocks the NAS brain-wave reading machine. You must wear the hat before you can be told the real truth about Democrats without alerting the authorities to our position. If they ever figure out we are in the Atlanta area we're done for.


Put on your hat, I'm going to PM you a secret coded message.

[.blank cd]

Everyone knows the tinfoil blocks the NAS brain-wave reading machine. You must wear the hat before you can be told the real truth about Democrats without alerting the authorities to our position. If they ever figure out we are in the Atlanta area we're done for.


Put on your hat, I'm going to PM you a secret coded message.

BESURETODRINKYOUROVALTINE


Ovaltine?


Son of a BITCH

[BanginJimmy]

They must also be the purveyors of this quality journalism

http://www.nationalenquirer.com/sites/nationalenquirer.com/files/imagecache/node_page_image/article_images/cover_story_12.jpg

These types of magazines have broken dozens of scandal stories over the last few years. If I remember correctly, they are the ones that broke the John Edwards and Elliot Spitzer scandals.


You didnt answer my question though. Do you believe the attack on the Consulate was a protest over a video that went overboard? This was the administrations official stance for nearly 2 weeks, starting the evening after the Rose Garden speech.

[bu villain]

I'm not going to claim I know the details of what really happened but if the CIA was in constant communication with people on the ground at the embassy, why do you think they would refuse to help? Unfortunately, I'm sure it will be a long time before all the details will be available.

[.blank cd]

You didnt answer my question though. Do you believe the attack on the Consulate was a protest over a video that went overboard? This was the administrations official stance for nearly 2 weeks, starting the evening after the Rose Garden speech.
I believe it is whatever it is. If its a calculated terrorist attack that capitalized opportunistically off of the situation, then that's what happened. But until the details are released, we won't know. I think it's highly implausible that the CIA refused to send help, an if someone in fact did order them to stand down, I'm sure there was a reason. I think it's not only premature, but also unpatriotic and rather insulting to politicize the death of these military soldiers in order to try and find a reason to smear the president.

[BanginJimmy]

I'm not going to claim I know the details of what really happened but if the CIA was in constant communication with people on the ground at the embassy, why do you think they would refuse to help? Unfortunately, I'm sure it will be a long time before all the details will be available.




I believe it is whatever it is. If its a calculated terrorist attack that capitalized opportunistically off of the situation, then that's what happened. But until the details are released, we won't know. I think it's highly implausible that the CIA refused to send help, an if someone in fact did order them to stand down, I'm sure there was a reason. I think it's not only premature, but also unpatriotic and rather insulting to politicize the death of these military soldiers in order to try and find a reason to smear the president.

I know I'm not going to convince either of you to change your mind. All I will say is that the proof is out there and confirmed. Take the time and read it then ask yourself if he is someone that can be trusted with the responsibilities of the office he holds.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[.blank cd]

Here-say and rumors won't change my mind

[David88vert]

Here-say and rumors won't change my mind

Cold hard proof and truth doesn't change your mind either - you've shown that previously.

[.blank cd]

Cold hard proof and truth doesn't change your mind either - you've shown that previously.

Don't think I've ever denied something in the face of cold hard truth. If you could reference a case where I have ill gladly clear up any misconceptions you might have. Still haven't seen that in this case anyway.

[bu villain]

I know I'm not going to convince either of you to change your mind. All I will say is that the proof is out there and confirmed. Take the time and read it then ask yourself if he is someone that can be trusted with the responsibilities of the office he holds.

Actually you could. Currently I haven't made up my mind if there was any wrong doing because I don't know enough information. There is definitely some fishy things going on but I don't have the information to make a solid conclusion either way. If you have that solid information, it could sway me. I'm not planning to vote for Obama so whether I trust him or not isn't all that relevant.

[BanginJimmy]

And the plot thickens.

CIA Director David Petraeus resigns, cites extramarital affair - U.S. News (http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/11/09/15054517-cia-director-david-petraeus-resigns-cites-extramarital-affair?lite)



Odd timing dont you think?

[Echonova]

It's always an odd time to pound some strange...










Women can never ever keep a secret.

[.blank cd]

Guy runs a top secret clandestine organization

...gets caught having an affair?

[BanginJimmy]

Guy runs a top secret clandestine organization

...gets caught having an affair?

Exactly what I was thinking. Maybe I am looking too much into it. Maybe this has been a foregone conclusion since before the election and he simply waited until after the election for political reasons.

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk 2

[Sinfix_15]

Guy runs a top secret clandestine organization

...gets caught having an affair?

lol... even though i try..... i cant force myself to dislike you.

[Echonova]

Rumor is, said creeping chick accessed his computer... Not saying it's true, but that's why it's a rumor.




Also he announced he won't testify next week about Benghazi.

[BanginJimmy]

So, this is back in the news and juicer than ever.

At this point it has been proven that someone in the Whore House or the State Dept. changed the CIA talking points. Unless I hear something that contradicts it, I no longer think Susan Rice was the issue. I think she purposefully given bad info.

Also waiting his time, the #2 man in Libya who is about to testify that a response team stationed in Tripoli was told to stand down. Last I heard it was the Pentagon that gave that order, but I dont know for sure as I only heard half the story.

Lastly, the only reason for the coverup is for political gain. I just dont understand why the State Dept denied Stevens added security. What did they have to lose by doing that? Its not like it would have made the news and used against the Obama campaign. The only other reason I see would be ineptitude. I can see the Obama campaign covering up ineptitude among Obama's senior staff and advisors.


Wednesday should be the day though. That is when the #2 man in Libya is to testify in front of the House.

[Echonova]

After doing a thorough and extensive investigation into this, I can come to one and only one explanation. Apparently an old enemy has reared it's ugly head...










Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.

[BanginJimmy]

Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.

Fox News reported it so it is obviously all lies.

[Echonova]

Fox News reported it so it is obviously all lies.Yeah...



Diplomat: US team stopped from going to Benghazi (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/diplomat-us-team-stopped-going-benghazi)

[.blank cd]

Selective outrage machine again. Damn it's loud.

[BanginJimmy]

Selective outrage machine again. Damn it's loud.

selective denial is just as obvious.


As I said before, and you objected to, you have your mind made up already and nothing could change that. Obama said it was a protest that got out of hand so thats the end of the story as far as you are concerned.

[Vteckidd]

This is going to be a lot bigger scandal than anything we have seen in years. This is BAD. Someone, we dont know who, but SOMEONE covered up a major terrorist attack so it wouldnt hurt Obama during a presidential campaign. Its going to come out, and its already starting to unravel.

[.blank cd]

selective denial is just as obvious.


As I said before, and you objected to, you have your mind made up already and nothing could change that. Obama said it was a protest that got out of hand so thats the end of the story as far as you are concerned.You sure about that?

[Sinfix_15]

Selective outrage machine again. Damn it's loud.

It's clear that you're prepared to "go down with the ship" when it comes to king Obama. Know that you're gonna be on the wrong side of history. Hopefully one day you will look in the mirror, be honest with yourself and know that you're moron.

[.blank cd]

It's clear that you're prepared to "go down with the ship" when it comes to king Obama. Know that you're gonna be on the wrong side of history. Hopefully one day you will look in the mirror, be honest with yourself and know that you're moron.
Im going to strongly doubt all of that.

4 years from now, after the right has milked this thing into lactose dust, no one will remember a thing. Nothing will come of it. It's not like Watergate.

[Sinfix_15]

Im going to strongly doubt all of that.

4 years from now, after the right has milked this thing into lactose dust, no one will remember a thing. Nothing will come of it. It's not like Watergate.

You're right. It's worse. Nobody died at watergate.

[Echonova]

It's clear that you're prepared to "go down with the ship" when it comes to king Obama. Know that you're gonna be on the wrong side of history. Hopefully one day you will look in the mirror, be honest with yourself and know that you're moron.This isn't going to bring down Obama. He told Hillary and Panetta to handle it and disappeared for the night. Plus, with all the lower-level faceless government staff... Way too many scapegoats for it ever to reach the oval office. If he had anything "to do with" at all. I think someone, somewhere in the chain made a decision they probably shouldn't have, rather than dare wake a high-ranking exec with a "3am phone call".


Obama is a master at not being accountable for hard decisions.

[Echonova]

Same goes for the cover-up... It will come out that Obama was lied to about there being a protest, and he was just going on the information he had.



Clearly not his fault.

[Echonova]

Now if it comes out Stevens was there because we were running guns... That will be the CIA's fault.

[Vteckidd]

Im going to strongly doubt all of that.

4 years from now, after the right has milked this thing into lactose dust, no one will remember a thing. Nothing will come of it. It's not like Watergate.
Its worse than watergate. Watergate was about wire tapping the opposition.

This is a deliberate coverup by a high ranking administration official to protect Obama during a presidential campaign.

Its doesnt bother you that 4 people died and we have not brought the culprits to justice? And the fact we havent brought them to justice is because the administration decided to take its sweet time to investigate the matter, and told people to keep quiet, and blamed a farce of a video on why this happened?

The facts are loud and clear. This was a terroist attack on the anniversary of 9/11. The Admin wanted it to go away because if it WAS a terrorist attack, the stump message of "we killed bin laden terrorism is over, we are safer" would be completely and categorically 100% false.

Which we now know its wrong anyways because of the recent boston marathon bombing.

This is BAD for Obama and he knows it.

[.blank cd]

Its doesnt bother you that 4 people died and we have not brought the culprits to justice? And the fact we havent brought them to justice is because the administration decided to take its sweet time to investigate the matter, and told people to keep quiet, and blamed a farce of a video on why this happened?

No. Thousands upon thousands of people have died in the war on terror. Why did we suddenly catch feelings for these particular four?

It would seem to me that the right have found some ammunition to smite Obama and they would rather use their efforts on smearing him over this than bringing the culprits to justice. This is what's known as the selective outrage machine. And THAT is despicable. It's not bad for him. He's been elected and he's gonna serve the rest of his term.

[Browning151]

He's been elected and he's gonna serve the rest of his term.

That could all depend on how big this thing really gets. It's growing pretty damn fast and getting uglier and uglier, but as Echo said there's a lot of scapegoats along the way and Obama is nothing short of a master at not taking responsibility. I generally dismiss impeachment type talk as nonsense, but this thing just keeps getting bigger and uglier.

[.blank cd]

That could all depend on how big this thing really gets. It's growing pretty damn fast and getting uglier and uglier, but as Echo said there's a lot of scapegoats along the way and Obama is nothing short of a master at not taking responsibility. I generally dismiss impeachment type talk as nonsense, but this thing just keeps getting bigger and uglier.

It's not getting uglier. It's all the GOP has to make Obama look bad and they're gonna milk it dry. He will not be impeached. Lol. If something happened in a department I'm not really in charge of, I probably wouldn't take much responsibility for it either.

What you all SHOULD be upset about is that no one has been held responsible and conservative politicians have been on a witch hunt to make Obama look bad, to make themselves look good. It's sickening that this is what political discourse has come to.

[Sinfix_15]

No. Thousands upon thousands of people have died in the war on terror. Why did we suddenly catch feelings for these particular four?

It would seem to me that the right have found some ammunition to smite Obama and they would rather use their efforts on smearing him over this than bringing the culprits to justice. This is what's known as the selective outrage machine. And THAT is despicable. It's not bad for him. He's been elected and he's gonna serve the rest of his term.

Obama is the problem. He needs smiting, he needs smearing..... the best thing anyone in power can do to help america is to get rid of Obama any way they can. Obama has a laundry list of shitty decisions to chose from, pick whichever one gets attention and use it to get rid of this buffoon. You stand beside your king right or wrong, truthfully.... YOU are the problem. Obama is a fool, among many things.... but YOU and people like you made it possible for this fool to be president. The fact that you continue to stand beside him even though he's proven to be everything his critics ever accused him of and more just pours salt in the wound.

The worst president in the history of our country, yet he has loyal and devoted followers who love him unconditionally..... and for what??? food stamps, birth control and gay marriage.... i dont know what sucks more... seeing america go to shit.... or seeing so many people like you who seem perfectly happy and content to see it go to shit.

[.blank cd]

Lol. Evidence? You have zero. None. Not a sliver. Everything you've ever said against Obama is the product of partisan hackery and conspiracy theory, reinforced with circular reasoning and can be quickly countered by actual facts. Obama may not be as good as we hoped, but the truth is he's not the moron you make him out to be. Educated people like me make it possible for other educated people to become president and continue this nation on a forward path. Sorry to break the ugly truth to you like this.

The only thing leading this country to shit is the brand of willful political ignorance and radical individualism you and others like you subscribe to.

[eraser4g63]

Truth is they all suck and should be replaced form the top down and in both directions. There was a major fuck up with... well everything that has happened over the last 5 years. But the previous administration ( while barely better than the current) suck ass just as bad.

Oh yeah, and blank there is always some truth behind rumors. But perhaps we can blame bush as well.

[.blank cd]

Oh yeah, and blank there is always some truth behind rumors. But perhaps we can blame bush as well.

Facts always win over rumor and conspiracy. Every single time. No exception.

[Browning151]

It's not getting uglier. It's all the GOP has to make Obama look bad and they're gonna milk it dry. He will not be impeached.

Sure, if you believe the narrative from the administration it isn't getting uglier, from everyone else point of view it is.


Lol. If something happened in a department I'm not really in charge of, I probably wouldn't take much responsibility for it either.

Really? Pretty sure when you are the #1 in charge you are responsible for the actions of everyone under you, no matter your amount of "direct" control, it's your job to either oversee what is happening or put competent people in positions to handle that for you (Obama has done neither). If they fuck up, you are ultimately responsible. At least that's the way it works in the real world that I live in, maybe it's different for you.

[Sinfix_15]

Facts always win over rumor and conspiracy. Every single time. No exception.

The people calling everything a conspiracy are the one's trying to get away with it................................................ .................................................. ...


The lies continue to be uncovered... you just refuse to accept reality. I've posted 3 different "conspiracy theories" being proven true in the last 2 weeks..... did anyone from the liberal media jump to say "oops, my bad" after their relentless character assassinations??? nope.... your side is happy to tell any lie. There's not a lower life form walking this planet than a liberal democrat. Your ego justifies any action taken to achieve your agenda. No matter how much harm is done, lives are lost, lies are told.... democrats like you think it's worth it in the end to push your agenda. AT BEST............. people in benghazi died because Obama didnt want it being a distraction on the campaign trail.

[.blank cd]

Sure, if you believe the narrative from the administration it isn't getting uglier, from everyone else point of view it is.I don't subscribe to anyone's narrative. Just facts. From a Neo-conservative point of view, sure. It's getting uglier. I'd guess its easy to look at it that way when you're working backwards from "Obama bad". Lol


Really? Pretty sure when you are the #1 in charge you are responsible for the actions of everyone under you, no matter your amount of "direct" control, it's your job to either oversee what is happening or put competent people in positions to handle that for you (Obama has done neither). If they fuck up, you are ultimately responsible. At least that's the way it works in the real world that I live in, maybe it's different for you....and here presents the breakdown in information and willfull ignorance manifests itself. Research the CIA and the executive branch's responsibility of it. Then join me in reality, and not the Fox's news version of it that you live in.

[.blank cd]

The people calling everything a conspiracy are the one's trying to get away with it.You're precisely right. I'm trying to get away with a political conspiracy. What you've just demonstrated is circular reasoning.


The lies continue to be uncovered... you just refuse to accept reality. I've posted 3 different "conspiracy theories" being proven true in the last 2 weeks..... did anyone from the liberal media jump to say "oops, my bad" after their relentless character assassinations???Yep. Proven true by nameless sources who happened to not be present at the time of the attacks. Awesome sources.


There's not a lower life form walking this planet than a liberal democrat.This is hilarious.


Your ego justifies any action taken to achieve your agenda. No matter how much harm is done, lives are lost, lies are told.... democrats like you think it's worth it in the end to push your agenda. AT BEST.............Willful ignorance.


people in benghazi died because Obama didnt want it being a distraction on the campaign trail.People in Benghazi died because someone killed them. To believe otherwise is undeniably false, deplorable, and represents the politicization of the deaths of four individuals in order to smear the administration and promote the "Obama bad" agenda by way of the complete and utter disregard and lack of legitimate information. Fucking sickening by all parties involved in using their efforts for this instead of bringing the people responsible for their deaths to justice. End of story.

[.blank cd]

So the narrative is Obama let four Americans die in order to distract attention from the election, or he covered it up for less than a week with the "video" story in mid September so that he could win the election in November. Ask yourselves how incredibly stupid both of those scenarios sound.

[Sinfix_15]

You're precisely right. I'm trying to get away with a political conspiracy. What you've just demonstrated is circular reasoning.

Yep. Proven true by nameless sources who happened to not be present at the time of the attacks. Awesome sources.

This is hilarious.

Willful ignorance.

People in Benghazi died because someone killed them. To believe otherwise is undeniably false, deplorable, and represents the politicization of the deaths of four individuals in order to smear the administration and promote the "Obama bad" agenda by way of the complete and utter disregard and lack of legitimate information. Fucking sickening by all parties involved in using their efforts for this instead of bringing the people responsible for their deaths to justice. End of story.

People in newtown died because someone killed them. To believe otherwise is undeniably false, deplorable, and represents the politicization of their deaths in order to smear the 2nd amendment and promote the anti-gun agenda by way of complete and utter disregard of legitimate information.


Every day a new liberal proclaimed "conspiracy theory" is being proven accurate...... you egomaniacs think you can just sit on your pedestal and call everyone else a liar. Obama will answer for his actions and you will forever be known the fool that you are for supporting him.

[.blank cd]

People in newtown died because someone killed them. To believe otherwise is undeniably false, deplorable, and represents the politicization of their deaths in order to smear the 2nd amendment and promote the anti-gun agenda by way of complete and utter disregard of legitimate information.If there were a legitimate anti gun agenda, Id be right there with you. But since there isn't...I dunno what to say...



Every day a new liberal proclaimed "conspiracy theory" is being proven accurate......False


you people who know things outside of your own personal reality bubble think you can just sit on your pedestal and call everyone else a liar.fixed that for you.


Obama will answer for his actions and you will forever be known the fool that you are for supporting him.I'm gonna put this prediction right up there with your spot-on prediction of the 2012 electoral vote results.

[Sinfix_15]

If there were a legitimate anti gun agenda, Id be right there with you. But since there isn't...I dunno what to say...



You truly are a blithering idiot.

[.blank cd]

You truly are a blithering idiot.

Says the guy who thinks increased legislation means taking away guns. Lol.

But I digress. This way of thought also produced "pro-life" and "War on [insert idea here]

New McCarthyism

[Browning151]

...and here presents the breakdown in information and willfull ignorance manifests itself. Research the CIA and the executive branch's responsibility of it. Then join me in reality, and not the Fox's news version of it that you live in.

The D/CIA is nominated by the president and then confirmed by the Senate. If the D/CIA is incompetent and cannot perform his job who is responsible for "hiring" him?

No, the president doesn't have direct control over CIA policies, he does however have the ability and responsibility to remove the director if needed. The president is ultimately responsible for the person who holds that position and the consequences of that decision.

Is that reality enough for you or would you like to dedicate an entire thread to studying the nuances of executive control over varying federal agencies?

[.blank cd]

No, the president doesn't have direct control over CIA policies, he does however have the ability and responsibility to remove the director if needed. The president is ultimately responsible for the person who holds that position and the consequences of that decision.Thats all we needed. So, if the director of the CIA decides not to send his men into a "hot zone", is that also Obamas decision to?


Is that reality enough for you or would you like to dedicate an entire thread to studying the nuances of executive control over varying federal agencies?It would be nice, but some of us might consider that "liberal" information, and thus, dismiss it. Lol.

[Sinfix_15]

Says the guy who thinks increased legislation means taking away guns. Lol.

But I digress. This way of thought also produced "pro-life" and "War on [insert idea here]

New McCarthyism

The Gosnell abortion clinic is the application of democratic policy on abortion. Obama voted for partial birth abortion. "partial birth abortion" is a palatable way of saying "kill the fucking baby after it's born". So think about it, we as a society have drifted so far away from morality that we are willing to kill babies to prevent them from being an inconvenience. Even as you stand affiliated with the biggest scum in our country, you still have the arrogance to mock others. Even though i am a pro-choice atheist.... i dont feel the need to mock people who are pro-life and i can respect where theyre coming from. Even though i am pro-choice.... there is a line to be crossed and we have crossed it. There is no moral compass with liberals. You really are the lowest life forms on the planet. Left unimpeded democrats will turn this country into a cesspool and tear down the foundation that makes us the country that we are.

and they want my gun????? Good luck with that.

[Vteckidd]

No. Thousands upon thousands of people have died in the war on terror. Why did we suddenly catch feelings for these particular four?

It would seem to me that the right have found some ammunition to smite Obama and they would rather use their efforts on smearing him over this than bringing the culprits to justice. This is what's known as the selective outrage machine. And THAT is despicable. It's not bad for him. He's been elected and he's gonna serve the rest of his term.

It shows lack of leadership. People in the theater of war who are killed, arent involved in a cover up where innocent people were murdered.

Of course you will only choose to see and believe what you want to. There is nothing partisan about the facts, the facts are we had a terrorist attack and the Admin covered it up to protect obama in the election.

Im not saying that Obama is responsible, Im saying someone HIGH up on the administration is responsible. This is BAD for him, and if it wasnt, then they would have put all the facts out by now. They arent interested in catching the culprits because it will prove exctly the opposite of what his regimes message is.

[.blank cd]

The Gosnell abortion clinic is the application of democratic policy on abortion. Obama voted for partial birth abortion. "partial birth abortion" is a palatable way of saying "kill the fucking baby after it's born". So think about it, we as a society have drifted so far away from morality that we are willing to kill babies to prevent them from being an inconvenience. Even as you stand affiliated with the biggest scum in our country, you still have the arrogance to mock others. Even though i am a pro-choice atheist.... i dont feel the need to mock people who are pro-life and i can respect where theyre coming from. Even though i am pro-choice.... there is a line to be crossed and we have crossed it. There is no moral compass with liberals. You really are the lowest life forms on the planet. Left unimpeded democrats will turn this country into a cesspool and tear down the foundation that makes us the country that we are.
And you don't know what a partial birth abortion is. Color me surprised.

[.blank cd]

It shows lack of leadership. People in the theater of war who are killed, arent involved in a cover up where innocent people were murdered.I don't think you understand what "theater of war" means. Lol.


Of course you will only choose to see and believe what you want to. There is nothing partisan about the facts, the facts are we had a terrorist attack and the Admin covered it up to protect obama in the election.Im just not going to pretend its anything more than it is. There are zero facts to date that suggest it was a cover up for Obamas election. None at all. Even if they covered it up, they did a horrible job at it, as more information was revealed in less than a week after it happened, with more than a month left until the election.

I'll believe the facts, and the facts right now suggest a focus on an Obama administration witch hunt. It's pretty despicable if you ask me.

[.blank cd]

The Board found that intelligence provided no immediate, specific tactical warning of the September 11 attacks. Known gaps existed in the intelligence community’s understanding of extremist militias in Libya and the potential threat they posed to U.S. interests, although some threats were known to exist.
Game. Set. Match.

GOP. How about we focus on catching the bad guys instead of postulating and witch hunting. K?

[BanginJimmy]

I'll believe the facts, and the facts right now suggest a focus on an Obama administration witch hunt. It's pretty despicable if you ask me.


Where are these facts at? All I have seen come out lately is contradictions to the Admin's story.



Game. Set. Match.

GOP. How about we focus on catching the bad guys instead of postulating and witch hunting. K?

Not in the least.

[.blank cd]

Where are these facts at?Thats what Im wondering. Lol


Not in the least.Sorry. Doesn't get more factual than that. Lol. Sucks when conspiracy theories crumble huh? Lol.

[Vteckidd]

Blank you just dont want to see what the facts show.

Why were special ops teams told to stand down and wait as the attack took place? Why were the talking heads of the administration so quick to blame something they KNEW wasnt the cause (a video that had been made 5 months earlier)? Why did Carney, Obama, and Clinton all say the attack was in response to a video for 9 days straight, then, claim they never said that, DESPITE VIDEO STATEMENTS THAT PROVE OTHERWISE. This isnt smoke and mirrors, this is on tape, on air lies.

Why are people coming forward with no political affiliation claiming that administration officials have told them to keep quiet (the whistleblowers testifying tomorrow?) Several agencies have confirmed that people told them to stand down during the attack, the CIA changed the pentagons talking points for no reason.

They are hiding something.

This isnt like some bullshit theory that the govt planned the boston marathon bombings from Alex Jones.

Ok, tell me where the perpetrators are? We can find 2 kids in a crowd in boston but we cant find the attackers in Libya with all the surveillance and video we have there?

[Vteckidd]

FYI Congress provides oversight to the executive branches decisions. No review board or report clears anyone. Congress will have to get to the bottom of it, no one else.

[Browning151]

Blank you just dont want to see what the facts show.

Why were special ops teams told to stand down and wait as the attack took place? Why were the talking heads of the administration so quick to blame something they KNEW wasnt the cause (a video that had been made 5 months earlier)? Why did Carney, Obama, and Clinton all say the attack was in response to a video for 9 days straight, then, claim they never said that, DESPITE VIDEO STATEMENTS THAT PROVE OTHERWISE. This isnt smoke and mirrors, this is on tape, on air lies.

Why are people coming forward with no political affiliation claiming that administration officials have told them to keep quiet (the whistleblowers testifying tomorrow?) Several agencies have confirmed that people told them to stand down during the attack, the CIA changed the pentagons talking points for no reason.

They are hiding something.

This isnt like some bullshit theory that the govt planned the boston marathon bombings from Alex Jones.

Ok, tell me where the perpetrators are? We can find 2 kids in a crowd in boston but we cant find the attackers in Libya with all the surveillance and video we have there?

Now now, you're just talking like some right-wing conspiracy theorist.

[Vteckidd]

THe problem for Obama is if this was a Terrorist attack perpetrated by Islamic Militants, his ENTIRE SPIEL about how "OSAMA IS DEAD, AL QAEDA IS DEFEATED" that he and Biden were spewing on the campaign trail , was FALSE.

The fact is an Ambassador died on his watch, he should be held accountable and all agencies involved should be held acountable for the actions that lead to that death(s).

[Browning151]

The fact is an Ambassador died on his watch, he should be held accountable and all agencies involved should be held acountable for the actions that lead to that death(s).

But Obama doesn't have direct control over those people, so it's all good, his hands are clean. Well, at least in blanks fantasy world that's how it works.

[.blank cd]

Blank you just dont want to see what the facts show.What facts? Lol. No facts. Just speculation and unidentified whistleblowers.


Why were special ops teams told to stand down and wait as the attack took place?Id suppose if anyone could answer this question, they should probably apply for the director of the CIA. Lol. It's quite possible, given the lack of intelligence, the decision makers didn't want to turn 4 dead bodies into 20 something dead bodies.

Why were the talking heads of the administration so quick to blame something they KNEW wasnt the cause (a video that had been made 5 months earlier)? Why did Carney, Obama, and Clinton all say the attack was in response to a video for 9 days straight, then, claim they never said that, DESPITE VIDEO STATEMENTS THAT PROVE OTHERWISE. This isnt smoke and mirrors, this is on tape, on air lies.[/quote]Obama, two days after the attack:

"So what I want all of you to know is that we are going to bring those who killed our fellow Americans to justice. I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America"

Can you point out and quote for me which part said this was definitely because of a video?

Clinton, a couple weeks later:

"I’m in charge of the State Department’s 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn’t be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They’re the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision"

So Obama doesn't know. And no one really knows except the CIA and those investigating it. For all they knew at the time, it was a response to the video until more information became available.

AT THE VERY WORST its bad intelligence on the CIAs part. But a "cover-up" is simply conspiracy theory with no evidence to back it up. Plain and simple


This isnt like some bullshit theory that the govt planned the boston marathon bombings from Alex Jones.And that's what's so troubling is that it wasnt Alex Jones that propagated this BS. It was a combination between the right and Fox News.

It's such a horrible conspiracy theory, that EVEN FOX NEWS OWN REPORTERS didnt want anything to do with it. LOL. They cut his mic off! LMAO

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2012/10/26/1094771/geraldo-to-fox-stop-this-on-libya/?mobile=wp

Like I've said. Conspiracy theory, useless political demagoguery, witch hunting, utter BS, take your pick. Lol. In any case, I'm not gonna give it an ounce of credibility until facts prove otherwise, as with any other conspiracy theory, and so far, they haven't. I'm not gonna pretend like he's covering something up when he's not. He had the election wrapped up from jump street.

[.blank cd]

But Obama doesn't have direct control over those people, so it's all good, his hands are clean. Well, at least in blanks fantasy world that's how it works.facepalm. Lol.

[.blank cd]

THe problem for Obama is if this was a Terrorist attack perpetrated by Islamic Militants, his ENTIRE SPIEL about how "OSAMA IS DEAD, AL QAEDA IS DEFEATED" that he and Biden were spewing on the campaign trail , was FALSE.Osama bin Laden is dead. True. I didn't take away anything from his campaign than that.


The fact is an Ambassador died on his watch, he should be held accountable and all agencies involved should be held acountable for the actions that lead to that death(s).When its all said and done, the people responsible (the terrorists) will be held accountable. It's rather unfortunate that the blame has shifted from those that pulled the trigger to the administration. Pretty sickening.

[Vteckidd]

I am not going to waste my time pulling all the video snippets out , go to youtube you can see it yourself. They blamed a video, then said they never blamed a video. They refused to call it a terrorist attack in the beginning, they called it a protest.

There is documentation that proves they KNEW it was a terrorist attack from the first minute.

So why change the story? Why hide something? UNLESS YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO HIDE.

[Vteckidd]

With all due respect its clear you havent followed the story enough to know whats going on.

There are so many holes in their story, and coupled with the whistleblowers now, it gives it credence. We also are trying to CATCH the bad guys, but the Admin stone walled the investigation for days/weeks. They blamed it on a video instead of going after the people that actually did this.

Its OBAMA who is not going after the bad guys, not the GOP LOL. Obama is the president, he could at the drop of a hat get our people into libya to seek and destroy. He didnt do that, because it would be admitting it was a terrorist attack in the middle of a presidential election which would have weakened him .

Time will tell, tomorrow should be an interesting day.

[Sinfix_15]

And you don't know what a partial birth abortion is. Color me surprised.

Yes i do. I posted diagrams about it months ago...... chalk it up as another thread where you called the idea a myth, lie or conspiracy theory.....



anyone noticing a trend here???????????????????????????????????

[Sinfix_15]

Blank, this is a partial birth abortion.... i posted this same picture months ago and you, like you always do, said it was a conspiracy theory... didnt happen.. yada yada right wing scare tactic... ect ect... typical left wing rhetoric.... This is the application of your king's policy. This is what democrats stand for... what they voted for............ what you defend..... and even mock people who oppose it.

http://livingjourney.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/partial-birth-abortion-thumb1.jpg?w=452&h=432

[.blank cd]

anyone noticing a trend here???????????????????????????????????
Yes. There's A LOT of things you are willfully ignorant about.

[Sinfix_15]

Yes. There's A LOT of things you are willfully ignorant about.

Says you.... the delusional liberal living in a fantasy world. The trend is that everything you say is a myth, lie or conspiracy theory all seems to turn out to be the truth. Even when faced with the truth, you still chose to believe in your fantasy perception of this president.

[.blank cd]

Blank, this is a partial birth abortion.... i posted this same picture months ago and you, like you always do, said it was a conspiracy theory... didnt happen.. yada yada right wing scare tactic... ect ect... typical left wing rhetoric.... This is the application of your king's policy. This is what democrats stand for... what they voted for............ what you defend..... and even mock people who oppose it.

http://livingjourney.files.wordpress.com/2008/10/partial-birth-abortion-thumb1.jpg?w=452&h=432

Thank you for posting a very misleading picture. I know you don't know what a partial birth abortion is because no one in the medical field uses the term. So everything you know about it is probably loaded in one way or another.

The term is actually called an IDX, or an intact dilation and extraction. The procedure is, in reality, and not the rights version of it, used to pull already dead babies from the mothers womb, and represents far less than one percent of all abortions performed.

The trend I'm noticing is that, when an issue arises, instead of trying to figure out facts, you default to whatever position is the opposite of Obamas, and work backwards from there. That's called a confirmation bias. It's a logical fallacy, and its why you're wrong about 99.9999% of everything you've ever posted.

[Sinfix_15]

Thank you for posting a very misleading picture. I know you don't know what a partial birth abortion is because no one in the medical field uses the term. So everything you know about it is probably loaded in one way or another.

The term is actually called an IDX, or an intact dilation and extraction. The procedure is, in reality, and not the rights version of it, used to pull already dead babies from the mothers womb, and represents far less than one percent of all abortions performed.

The trend I'm noticing is that, when an issue arises, instead of trying to figure out facts, you default to whatever position is the opposite of Obamas, and work backwards from there. That's called a confirmation bias. It's a logical fallacy, and its why you're wrong about 99.9999% of everything you've ever posted.

When a partial birth abortion happens, does the fetus have arms? legs? eyes? a heart beat?

Does it look like this? or this another misleading picture?
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_uCfcGNDxeVc/R8rLG3tHBPI/AAAAAAAAAN8/nLuvk20nllU/s400/partial+birth+abortion.bmp

[Sinfix_15]

Blankcd
http://www.filmofilia.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/02/shutter_island_02.jpg

[.blank cd]

When a partial birth abortion happens, does the fetus have arms? legs? eyes? a heart beat?

Did you read what I posted at all? Or just the part you wanted to read? Go back and read it all again. I posted the answer to that already. I want you to quote it.

[David88vert]

Y'all are way off topic.

Benghazi - Let's stick to facts.
Benghazi was a terrorist act, plain and simple. This was an attack by our enemies, and wasn't just from a protest over a movie.
Did the Administration state that it was a protest over a movie? Yes.

Should Obama be held responsible for the actions of all of the individual under his leadership? In my opinion, no. No one ever asked Obama to add more protection to the US Embassy there. No one ever asked Obama if they could send in a SEAL team. He never got the opportunity to make that decision. If you think that the President reviews all decisions, they you have not worked in a delegated role before.

This attack would have happened no matter who was President - Romney, Obama, or even "Bush". No President can defend against all of the evil actions that our enemies take, and we shouldn't expect them to. You cannot rationally hold Obama accountable for the attack, or even the US response to it.

As for a "cover up", Obama has nothing to gain from one. Perhaps someone else thought that they should minimize calling it a terrorist act, but the truth is that, from a political standpoint, Obama should have immediately called it a terrorist act, and used it to unite the citizens with him. He did not exploit this opportunity in a political fashion, as he could have.

My opinion is that we should unite and support our current President in all efforts to hunt down and prosecute the individuals that actually committed these acts -not look to make the President a scapegoat.

[Vteckidd]

I would agree on the last part, however there are huge holes in the timeline and story that people have to answer for. We did it during 9/11 , WTC 1, Boston bombing , etc.

[.blank cd]

Y'all are way off topic.When Sinfix starts spewing a bunch of BS, I like to cleanse it as thoroughly as possible


Benghazi - Let's stick to facts.

Did the Administration state that it was a protest over a movie? Yes.Sort of. Everyone all the way down the chain said "from what I know right now" or "based on the information I have" and followed it up with something like "but there's still an investigation..."




but the truth is that, from a political standpoint, Obama should have immediately called it a terrorist act, and used it to unite the citizens with him. He did not exploit this opportunity in a political fashion, as he could have.Obama, in his first statement about the attacks to the media, the day after it happened:

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.

[Sinfix_15]

When Sinfix starts spewing a bunch of BS, I like to cleanse it as thoroughly as possible

Sort of. Everyone all the way down the chain said "from what I know right now" or "based on the information I have" and followed it up with something like "but there's still an investigation..."



Obama, in his first statement about the attacks to the media, the day after it happened:

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.


You're the one that decided to mock the pro-life position...... i found that in shallow taste considering the recent discoveries.....

but... that's where i went wrong.... expecting class or dignity from a liberal dem.

[David88vert]

When Sinfix starts spewing a bunch of BS, I like to cleanse it as thoroughly as possible

Sort of. Everyone all the way down the chain said "from what I know right now" or "based on the information I have" and followed it up with something like "but there's still an investigation..."



Obama, in his first statement about the attacks to the media, the day after it happened:

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.

I am not faulting the Administration for their poor reporting, as the event was just unfolding. Obama intentionally did not state that the attack was a terrorist act, and he handled Boston the same way. Not an issue for me. Eventually, when more facts came out, it was revealed for what it is.

The fact is that they got it wrong initially, and then politics came into play. Politics never should have been injected into the mess to begin with. Regardless of political affiliation, there are times to set aside political differences and unite against common enemies - this is one of them. A foreign enemy does not care about your political position.

[.blank cd]

You're the one that decided to mock the pro-life position...... i found that in shallow taste considering the recent discoveries.....

but... that's where i went wrong.... expecting class or dignity from a liberal dem.

I mocked it because its called pro-life when its not pro-life, just anti-abortion/anti-choice.

[Vteckidd]

All of this is easily vetted. If youre going to use thinkprogress, i will use the opposite end of the spectrum. Again, most of this is reported by FOX which is the only place digging into it. But, CBS and Jay Carney alone report/speak enough to warrant an investigation.

They spun it as a video attack for weeks, then changed their tune. WHY?
http://download.premiereradio.net/guest/rushlimb/LimbaughLetterPDF/011_1112TLL_PMSDv3.pdf

[.blank cd]

All of this is easily vetted. If youre going to use thinkprogress, i will use the opposite end of the spectrum. Again, most of this is reported by FOX which is the only place digging into it. But, CBS and Jay Carney alone report/speak enough to warrant an investigation.

They spun it as a video attack for weeks, then changed their tune. WHY?
http://download.premiereradio.net/guest/rushlimb/LimbaughLetterPDF/011_1112TLL_PMSDv3.pdf
People change their story when new information becomes available. As they should. It's a sign of intelligence.

OH SHIT, i meant to quote and i hit EDIT, man my bad

[Vteckidd]

People change their story when new information becomes available. As they should. It's a sign of intelligence.



this isnt someone going "IT WAS THE SAUDIS"............oh wait................"ITS THE IRANIANS".............

this is 28 times the regime blames free speech and a youtube video despite them KNOWING from DAY 1 it was a TERRORIST attack. Obama said Terror, but then in the coming days blamed a youtube video, not the Al Qaeda people involved that they KNEW were involved.

[Vteckidd]

Fuck man i meant to hit QUOTE and i hit EDIT on accident............im sorry i erased what you said but i saw it.

[.blank cd]

this isnt someone going "IT WAS THE SAUDIS"............oh wait................"ITS THE IRANIANS".............

this is 28 times the regime blames free speech and a youtube video despite them KNOWING from DAY 1 it was a TERRORIST attack. Obama said Terror, but then in the coming days blamed a youtube video, not the Al Qaeda people involved that they KNEW were involved.

Yes, this was a terrorist attack, which he made clear from day 1, which, for all he/they knew, was inspired by the video, and could have been pre-meditated. Which was all said in the first few days. It was quite possible, at that point, that the terrorists capitalized off the emotions from the video, and attacked while suspicion was elsewhere. There is nothing about it that smells like cover up and it all sounds like a developing news story with details emerging as more information becomes available. The presidents MAIN JOB is to inform the American while minimizing panic. If I were him, I would have said the same thing given the information he knew at the time.

If the conspiracy theory didn't have Hannity's name all over it, since he was the person that created it, it'd be a little more plausible. But this is definitely more "witch hunt" than "lets figure out who/what'a responsible" at this time.

[Vteckidd]

They knew the day the attack happened, it wasnt anything to do with a video. So it was a lie. Susan Rice lied 3-4 days AFTER .

[.blank cd]

They knew the day the attack happened, it wasnt anything to do with a video. So it was a lie. Susan Rice lied 3-4 days AFTER .

There's proof it wasnt an opportunity attack? They caught the people responsible and asked them that?

[Vteckidd]

There's proof it wasnt an opportunity attack? They caught the people responsible and asked them that?

do you even read what is being testified right now?

Theres like 4 agencies, 5 cables, the ambassador who died, the libyan ambassador, CIA, Special ops confirming all within 3-4 hours of the attack initiating that it was a preplanned attack that was not "a spontaneous demonstration in response to a video"

Oh im sorry thats right, why take our own men and womens word as truth..............we should believe the terrorists we havent captured yet LOL

its not even a discussion anymore, SOMEONE in the ADMIN is lieing, and its someone high up. Im pretty sure its not OBama , but Hilary may have just watched her 2016 hopes vanish

[.blank cd]

do you even read what is being testified right now?

Theres like 4 agencies, 5 cables, the ambassador who died, the libyan ambassador, CIA, Special ops confirming all within 3-4 hours of the attack initiating that it was a preplanned attack that was not "a spontaneous demonstration in response to a video"Maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying "a spontaneous demonstration in reaction to a video" I'm saying "a premeditated attack that used the video as an opportunity".

Has someone figured out that a terrorist cell didnt pre-plan this attack and then used the video as a diversion? They must have captured someone and interrogated him to figure that out. Where is that evidence?

[Sinfix_15]

I mocked it because its called pro-life when its not pro-life, just anti-abortion/anti-choice.

Says someone who supports "the safe communities and safe schools act"

You might be the biggest hypocrite the world has ever known.....




well actually, i take that back.... all of you morons are cut from the same mold and spew the same nonsense.

[.blank cd]

Says someone who supports "the safe communities and safe schools act"

You might be the biggest hypocrite the world has ever known.....




well actually, i take that bad.... all of you morons are cut from the same mold and spew the same nonsense.

Yes. I supported some of it. What's your point?

[Sinfix_15]

Yes. I supported some of it. What's your point?

Clearly "safe communities safe schools act" was a perfectly unbiased name meant to give people an accurate idea of what the bill contained. There's no way possible that this name could have been misleading or political in nature..... i mean..... cause who in their right mind would vote against safe schools? right?....



get the point now or do you need to spoon feed it to you, scholar?

[.blank cd]

Yes. The safe schools act was the first bill in history to use emotionally charged names to get through passage and only Liberal Democrats are capable of doing it. And I only judge bills based on their name alone. Yep

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act

[Sinfix_15]

Yes. The safe schools act was the first bill in history to use emotionally charged names to get through passage and only Liberal Democrats are capable of doing it. And I only judge bills based on their name alone. Yep

Patriot Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriot_Act)

This is what i like to call the "i know you are but what am i" response from liberals.... when backed in to a corner and out of lies to tell and no way to spin out....

theyre left with the response "they did it to"... as if that makes it right.


But.... thank you for admitting that the "safe schools act" was an emotional name designed to manipulate those grieving of tragedy, that it was falsely labeled and did not accurately represent it's content. This small act of honesty is a huge step forward for you and i commend you.

[.blank cd]

This is what i like to call the "i know you are but what am i" response from liberals.... when backed in to a corner and out of lies to tell and no way to spin out....

theyre left with the response "they did it to"... as if that makes it right.


But.... thank you for admitting that the "safe schools act" was an emotional name designed to manipulate those grieving of tragedy, that it was falsely labeled and did not accurately represent it's content. This small act of honesty is a huge step forward for you and i commend you.

I'm not backed into a corner at all. YOU said its bullshit because of its name. I know its not right to use emotionally charged names to pass a bill, but I typically read the information within a bill before I decide to support it or not, so the name means nothing to me. Just as I supported some things in the patriot act, not because it was called the patriot act, but because some of those things were a benefit to the society at the time.

[Sinfix_15]

I'm not backed into a corner at all. YOU said its bullshit because of its name. I know its not right to use emotionally charged names to pass a bill, but I typically read the information within a bill before I decide to support it or not, so the name means nothing to me. Just as I supported some things in the patriot act, not because it was called the patriot act, but because some of those things were a benefit to the society at the time.

I did not say it's bullshit BECAUSE of its name. I said it's bullshit...... then laughed at the irony of it's name.

[David88vert]

Maybe you're misunderstanding what I'm saying. I'm not saying "a spontaneous demonstration in reaction to a video" I'm saying "a premeditated attack that used the video as an opportunity".

Has someone figured out that a terrorist cell didnt pre-plan this attack and then used the video as a diversion? They must have captured someone and interrogated him to figure that out. Where is that evidence?

And it just happened that the "opportunity" came on 9/11?

[.blank cd]

I did not say it's bullshit BECAUSE of its name. I said it's bullshit...... then laughed at the irony of it's name.

Then why did you even point out its name? I don't give a shit what they named it. They could have named it the free pink cotton candy for everyone bill. I would have read the bill and supported what's in it based on what's in it.

[David88vert]

Then why did you even point out its name? I don't give a shit what they named it. They could have named it the free pink cotton candy for everyone bill. I would have read the bill and supported what's in it based on what's in it.

Please don't give the Dems the idea to call it that. I might have to vote for it because everyone wants free pink cotton candy.

[.blank cd]

And it just happened that the "opportunity" came on 9/11?

The video was created in July 2012, then translated and uploaded in Arabic in September 2012, the week before. Do you think that was a coincidence as well? There were 10 other 9/11 dates before that, why pick 9/11/12?

You can speculate on coincidences all you want, or you could ask the people that killed the ambassadors why they did it and if they used the video as an opportunity. Seems to me like the right, and Fox News apparantly, would prefer to do the former.

Like I said, I'd be more inclined to believe it all if there was a legitimate motive, but there's none at the moment. No one seems to be as interested in finding that out at the moment.

[.blank cd]

Please don't give the Dems the idea to call it that. I might have to vote for it because everyone wants free pink cotton candy.

If there was a free pink cotton candy provision in the bill, I'd probably vote on that alone, even if another provision was that black people would be thrown back into Slavery. It would be well worth it.

[Sinfix_15]

Then why did you even point out its name? I don't give a shit what they named it. They could have named it the free pink cotton candy for everyone bill. I would have read the bill and supported what's in it based on what's in it.

They name it with two purposes.......

#1, make it something you might overlook and not dissect. They want you to go "oh, safe schools act... nothing to see here"
#2, politically charge the name so in future debates they can say "Johnny republican did not vote for safe schools, he doesnt want safe schools"

[Sinfix_15]

If there was a free pink cotton candy provision in the bill, I'd probably vote on that alone, even if another provision was that black people would be thrown back into Slavery. It would be well worth it.

Black people are thrown back into slavery................... the government just realized that mental chains are cheaper than actual chains.


"I freed a thousand slaves I could have freed a thousand more if only they knew they were slaves."

Harriet Tubman

[David88vert]

The video was created in July 2012, then translated and uploaded in Arabic in September 2012, the week before. Do you think that was a coincidence as well? There were 10 other 9/11 dates before that, why pick 9/11/12?

You can speculate on coincidences all you want, or you could ask the people that killed the ambassadors why they did it and if they used the video as an opportunity. Seems to me like the right, and Fox News apparantly, would prefer to do the former.

Like I said, I'd be more inclined to believe it all if there was a legitimate motive, but there's none at the moment. No one seems to be as interested in finding that out at the moment.

A crowd of protesters do not carry heavy weapons or attack on a specific anniversary. Possibility is not the same as Probability.

One thing is absolutely certain though. We should stand together against our enemy and support our President in this endeavour without political divide.

[Sinfix_15]

A crowd of protesters do not carry heavy weapons or attack on a specific anniversary. Possibility is not the same as Probability.

One thing is absolutely certain though. We should stand together against our enemy and support our President in this endeavour without political divide.

You cant stand with the cause of the problem to fix the problem.

[David88vert]

If there was a free pink cotton candy provision in the bill, I'd probably vote on that alone, even if another provision was that black people would be thrown back into Slavery. It would be well worth it.



Don't put slaves and cotton in the same sentence. Not tasteful.

[David88vert]

You cant stand with the cause of the problem to fix the problem.

Our government was not behind the attack.

[.blank cd]

A crowd of protesters do not carry heavy weapons or attack on a specific anniversary. Possibility is not the same as Probability.Im not saying protestors were responsible! Lol.

[David88vert]

Im not saying protestors were responsible! Lol.

So, these attackers were just sitting around for weeks on end, and just happened to see the protests and said to themselves, "Let's go attack now." - and it just happened to be on 9/11? Do you really believe that?

Terrorists wouldn't want to try to launch an attack on a 9/11 anniversary, would they?
9/11 Anniversary Terror Threat: At Least 2 Suspects In Possible Attack May Be U.S. Citizens, Say Officials (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/10/911-anniversary-terror-threat-suspects_n_956499.html)

[BanginJimmy]

The facts are there for anyone that isnt actively looking for ANY reason to give the Admin a pass.


I agree with David. I dont think Obama personally made the decision to cover this up. It was definitely someone among his senior staff and it was done for purely political reasons though. The best guess I have at this point would be Clinton as it was her Dept that dropped the ball at every stop.

Since we now have the unclassified CIA talking points that were given to the White House and we know there was never a mention of a demonstration or video, do you think we will ever find out who called for and made the changes?

[Sinfix_15]

Obama Admin Spent $70K To Run Overseas Ads Apologizing For YouTube Video (http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/05/10/Obama-Used-Taxpayer-Funds-in-Benghazi-Cover-Up?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

[.blank cd]

Obama Admin Spent $70K To Run Overseas Ads Apologizing For YouTube Video (http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-TV/2013/05/10/Obama-Used-Taxpayer-Funds-in-Benghazi-Cover-Up?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

Let uses this to build your critical analyzation skills a little.

1. Based on this one link alone, can you account for the legitimacy of this video?That is to say, are you sure if the State Dept. actually made this video, and its not the work of someone bored sitting behind his parents computer? It is not a difficult task to take two clips that were broadcast on free news channels, insert an Arabic translation caption at the bottom, and splash a state dept. logo at the end of it. With the right equipment, I could replicate that video in a matter of 10 minutes with a dead on balls Arabic translation.

2. IF the video is actually legitimate, and we're criticizing the $70k, why? Time and time again, have conservatives not claimed that hundreds of millions are only drops in the bucket when we're discussing revenue increases. Why is a $70k expenditure a problem?

3. If you're a journalist, and you have some kind of respect for balance and journalistic integrity, why use a politically and emotionally charged phrase like "Obama used X in taxpayer funds" when criticizing the content of the video? Why deviate off the subject to illicit an emotional response.

I give this link a D-

[Vteckidd]

Has nothing to do with the 70k. Why spend any money on something YOU KNOW DIDNT CAUSE THE EVENT in the first place.

Critical thinking my ass

[.blank cd]

Has nothing to do with the 70k. Why spend any money on something YOU KNOW DIDNT CAUSE THE EVENT in the first place.

Critical thinking my ass

That remains to be seen since we haven't really formally interrogated anyone yet.

But even if the video is legitimate, the message is still clear: We, as an administration, don't denigrate other religions, and attacking Muslims isn't what we consider freedom of speech.

[David88vert]

That remains to be seen since we haven't really formally interrogated anyone yet.


Actually, where have we formally interrogated anyone that supported that it was a protest over the YouTube video? Where is the evidence of that? Now that we have the CIA report, we can see that Rice's talking points did not get the allegation that it was over the posting of the video from the CIA report. So, where did the report come from saying that the attack was committed by the protesters?

[.blank cd]

Actually, where have we formally interrogated anyone that supported that it was a protest over the YouTube video? Where is the evidence of that?We haven't formally interrogated anyone yet, so there isn't much evidence of that yet either.


Now that we have the CIA report, we can see that Rice's talking points did not get the allegation that it was over the posting of the video from the CIA report. So, where did the report come from saying that the attack was committed by the protesters?

Who is still saying it was protestors? Who said it was protestors in the first place?

[David88vert]

We haven't formally interrogated anyone yet, so there isn't much evidence of that yet either.

Who is still saying it was protestors? Who said it was protestors in the first place?

So, there was no evidence, but the Administration did put forth that narrative.

"... in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous -- not a premeditated -- response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video that was disseminated.

We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to -- or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in -- in the wake of the revolution in Libya are -- are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there..." - Susan Rice on the ABC News interview with Jake Tapper, 7 months ago.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxf77xQ_NLU

[Vteckidd]

Who is still saying it was protestors? Who said it was protestors in the first place?

The entire Obama administration for oh,i dont know, like 4 weeks

Specifically, Jay Carney.
Obama and his Press Secretary Blaming the Video for the Benghazi Attack - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_Qx7Fmn4uE)

I mean what else do you need?

They blamed it on a video, and SOMEONE covered up the notion that it was a terrorist attack. LEt me be more clear:

Attack occurs
Special OPS and CIA confirm it was a terrorist attack
Ambassador confirms it was a terrorist attack
CIA CHANGES TALKING POINTS (Or someone changes the talking points to reflect a video)
Admin pushes Video story for weeks
RIce pushes video story for weeks
Admin now acts like NONE OF THAT HAPPENED.

THe problem isnt that they said man we dont know and then they figured it out. Someone , deliberately changed the story for a reason we can all speculate on. But the most plausible explanation is that it was to protect Obamas presidential re-election.

Now, you have people coming forward that are career diplomats with NO political affiliation saying they were told to lie, told not to talk to congress, and that no one ever spoke to them about the events that happened despite their first hand knowledge.

[Vteckidd]

An extreme version of this case would be

After 9/11, W says it was merely a commercial airliner off course that ran into the WTC, twice. The pilot was upset and may have drank the night before, crashed the plane. THen they send out people to blame PTS on the cause..................

THEN...........weeks later you find out that at the minutes following the plane crashing, the CIA, FBI, etc ALL KNEW it was a terrorist attack perpetrated by Al Qaeda.

[.blank cd]

The entire Obama administration for oh,i dont know, like 4 weeks

Specifically, Jay Carney.
Obama and his Press Secretary Blaming the Video for the Benghazi Attack - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_Qx7Fmn4uE)

I mean what else do you need?

They blamed it on a video, and SOMEONE covered up the notion that it was a terrorist attack. LEt me be more clear:

Attack occurs
Special OPS and CIA confirm it was a terrorist attack
Ambassador confirms it was a terrorist attack
CIA CHANGES TALKING POINTS (Or someone changes the talking points to reflect a video)
Admin pushes Video story for weeks
RIce pushes video story for weeks
Admin now acts like NONE OF THAT HAPPENED.

THe problem isnt that they said man we dont know and then they figured it out. Someone , deliberately changed the story for a reason we can all speculate on. But the most plausible explanation is that it was to protect Obamas presidential re-election.

Now, you have people coming forward that are career diplomats with NO political affiliation saying they were told to lie, told not to talk to congress, and that no one ever spoke to them about the events that happened despite their first hand knowledge.

Obama himself on DAY 2 said it was a terrorist attack, did he not?

At this point we are arguing semantics.

[Vteckidd]

Obama himself on DAY 2 said it was a terrorist attack, did he not?

At this point we are arguing semantics.
This is a textbook example of you seeing what you want to see and changing the subject. HAve i not said for 10 pages that "SOMEONE" changed the story, and that most of us dont believe Obama is to blame personally?

He half assed said it . He said something to the effect that terrorism isnt tolerated, but continued to blame the video, not anti american terrorists.

2 WEEKS AFTER THE ATTACK at the UN blaming the video
[FLASHBACK] At the UN Obama blames an internet video for Benghazi and the other attack - YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vSzdOPz1X0)


He said
"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation" in the rose Garden but he was talking about the anniversary of 9/11 and he never specifically said "what happened in Benghazi yesterday was a Terrorist attack by a militant group.

For Contrast, he specifically named the Tsarnaevs of being terrorists and perpetrating a terrorist attack, EVEN BEFORE WE KNEW IT WAS THEM.

[Vteckidd]

Even so, if he said it was a terrorist attack 2 days afterward, then why did Susan Rice and Jay Carney (his spokesperson) continue to blame a video they knew had NOTHING to do with the attack in the first place? And why did he mention that video in a speech at the UN?

You cant have it both ways.

[David88vert]

Even so, if he said it was a terrorist attack 2 days afterward, then why did Susan Rice and Jay Carney (his spokesperson) continue to blame a video they knew had NOTHING to do with the attack in the first place? And why did he mention that video in a speech at the UN?

You cant have it both ways.

He said it because his advisors told him to. He only has the information that they present to him.
He made the statement, it was a mistake, but I don't believe that it was an attempt by him to deceive the American people intentionally. If he wanted political gain, he could have just given the standard speech that "we will bring the terrorists to justice".

I do not think that we need to run Obama over the coals on this response that he gave. We need to focus on the enemy.

[.blank cd]

He said
"No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation" in the rose Garden but he was talking about the anniversary of 9/11and he never specifically said "what happened in Benghazi yesterday was a Terrorist attack by a militant group.Talk about seeing only what you want to see. LOL. IF YOU can convince me Obama walked up on that podium that day to talk specifically AND ONLY about the world trade centers collapsing, I will suck my own dick. LMAO.

[.blank cd]

Even so, if he said it was a terrorist attack 2 days afterward, then why did Susan Rice and Jay Carney (his spokesperson) continue to blame a video they knew had NOTHING to do with the attack in the first place? And why did he mention that video in a speech at the UN?

You cant have it both ways.

Do you know the attack had absolutely zero to do with the video? Have you personally interrogated suspects or people responsible? Because if you have, you might need to speak with someone at the state department quickly. That's very sensitive information.

[David88vert]

Obama's Rose Garden - Sept 12, 2012

Remarks by the President on the Deaths of U.S. Embassy Staff in Libya | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2012/09/12/remarks-president-deaths-us-embassy-staff-Libya)

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. Every day, all across the world, American diplomats and civilians work tirelessly to advance the interests and values of our nation. Often, they are away from their families. Sometimes, they brave great danger.

Yesterday, four of these extraordinary Americans were killed in an attack on our diplomatic post in Benghazi. Among those killed was our Ambassador, Chris Stevens, as well as Foreign Service Officer Sean Smith. We are still notifying the families of the others who were killed. And today, the American people stand united in holding the families of the four Americans in our thoughts and in our prayers.

The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. We're working with the government of Libya to secure our diplomats. I've also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world. And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.

Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts.

Already, many Libyans have joined us in doing so, and this attack will not break the bonds between the United States and Libya. Libyan security personnel fought back against the attackers alongside Americans. Libyans helped some of our diplomats find safety, and they carried Ambassador Stevens’s body to the hospital, where we tragically learned that he had died.

It's especially tragic that Chris Stevens died in Benghazi because it is a city that he helped to save. At the height of the Libyan revolution, Chris led our diplomatic post in Benghazi. With characteristic skill, courage, and resolve, he built partnerships with Libyan revolutionaries, and helped them as they planned to build a new Libya. When the Qaddafi regime came to an end, Chris was there to serve as our ambassador to the new Libya, and he worked tirelessly to support this young democracy, and I think both Secretary Clinton and I relied deeply on his knowledge of the situation on the ground there. He was a role model to all who worked with him and to the young diplomats who aspire to walk in his footsteps.

Along with his colleagues, Chris died in a country that is still striving to emerge from the recent experience of war. Today, the loss of these four Americans is fresh, but our memories of them linger on. I have no doubt that their legacy will live on through the work that they did far from our shores and in the hearts of those who love them back home.

Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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.

But we also know that the lives these Americans led stand in stark contrast to those of their attackers. These four Americans stood up for freedom and human dignity. They should give every American great pride in the country that they served, and the hope that our flag represents to people around the globe who also yearn to live in freedom and with dignity.

We grieve with their families, but let us carry on their memory, and let us continue their work of seeking a stronger America and a better world for all of our children.

Thank you. May God bless the memory of those we lost and may God bless the United States of America.

[Vteckidd]

Clearly this is futile when people don't read what you post and only see what they want.

Maybe if i just quoted people and used big words and said LOL I'd get somewhere .

[.blank cd]

Clearly this is futile when people don't read what you post and only see what they want.

Maybe if i just quoted people and used big words and said LOL I'd get somewhere .

What do you mean futile? I've heard the video and read this already and even quoted from it and it backs up everything I've said. He did not specifically mean 9/11/01. So I guess in a sense, yes. It is futile.

Lol.

[.blank cd]

BanginJimmy was absolutely right. All this information is there for those who want to villify him.

[Vteckidd]

What do you mean futile? I've heard the video and read this already and even quoted from it and it backs up everything I've said. He did not specifically mean 9/11/01. So I guess in a sense, yes. It is futile.

Lol.


Of course, yesterday was already a painful day for our nation as we marked the solemn memory of the 9/11 attacks. We mourned with the families who were lost on that day. I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed. And then last night, we learned the news of this attack in Benghazi.

As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.

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.

Exercise critical thinking. The comments are about the 9/11 memorial services he participated in, and that he was equating soldiers dieing in war (caused by 9/11/01) with diplomats dieing. He then calls ACTS OF TERROR , but never SPECIFiCALLY calls Benghazi and "act of terror". Which, honestly im ok with. Then, for the next 4 weeks, he calls it a VIDEO PROTEST that was SPONTANEOUS. He gives a speech 2 weeks later calling the Benghazi attack the cause of a despicable video.

He NEVER EVER EVER calls it an act of terrorism specifically or even in the weeks afterwards.

So, SOMEONE LIED TO HIM, WHICH MADE HIM LIE (unknowingly) TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. How do you not see that? The Video had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK, THE VIDEO WAS RELEASED 6 MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK ON OUR EMBASSY.

THEN this comes out today
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/)

OH LOOK ABC IS ACTUALLY REPORTING. ITS CLEAR HIlary and HIGHER are hiding something. The White House said only 1 word had been changed, now we find out its paragraphs 12 different times.

[David88vert]

Exercise critical thinking. The comments are about the 9/11 memorial services he participated in, and that he was equating soldiers dieing in war (caused by 9/11/01) with diplomats dieing. He then calls ACTS OF TERROR , but never SPECIFiCALLY calls Benghazi and "act of terror". Which, honestly im ok with. Then, for the next 4 weeks, he calls it a VIDEO PROTEST that was SPONTANEOUS. He gives a speech 2 weeks later calling the Benghazi attack the cause of a despicable video.

He NEVER EVER EVER calls it an act of terrorism specifically or even in the weeks afterwards.

So, SOMEONE LIED TO HIM, WHICH MADE HIM LIE (unknowingly) TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. How do you not see that? The Video had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK, THE VIDEO WAS RELEASED 6 MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK ON OUR EMBASSY.

THEN this comes out today
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/)

OH LOOK ABC IS ACTUALLY REPORTING. ITS CLEAR HIlary and HIGHER are hiding something. The White House said only 1 word had been changed, now we find out its paragraphs 12 different times.

Can we agree that we do not believe that Obama changed the text/talking points in an effort to intentionally lie? If so, I think that we should simply acknowledge it as an error, and move on. Personally, I am ok with his Administration making a mistake, as long as they correct it, and go after the enemy. Hindsight is 20/20, during the days after the attack, it was not.

[Vteckidd]

Can we agree that we do not believe that Obama changed the text/talking points in an effort to intentionally lie? If so, I think that we should simply acknowledge it as an error, and move on. Personally, I am ok with his Administration making a mistake, as long as they correct it, and go after the enemy. Hindsight is 20/20, during the days after the attack, it was not.

I do not believe Obama lied or was in on the cover up. But his Administration is responsible. Ive always said that.

If Obama didnt lie, then someone high up in his admin lied. I believe the latter. Someone in the State Dept / CIA was trying to protect his re-election

[David88vert]

I do not believe Obama lied or was in on the cover up. But his Administration is responsible. Ive always said that.

If Obama didnt lie, then someone high up in his admin lied. I believe the latter. Someone in the State Dept / CIA was trying to protect his re-election

While that is possible, that should have no bearing on the support of the President in regards to finding the perpetrators of this attack.

[Vteckidd]

While that is possible, that should have no bearing on the support of the President in regards to finding the perpetrators of this attack.

Ive never said i dont support us getting the perpetrators? Ive seen no evidence that the Prez is committed to finding them though as we have probably long since lost the bad guys by now by over politicizing the issue.

[.blank cd]

Exercise critical thinking. The comments are about the 9/11 memorial services he participated in, and that he was equating soldiers dieing in war (caused by 9/11/01) with diplomats dieing. He then calls ACTS OF TERROR , but never SPECIFiCALLY calls Benghazi and "act of terror".He started speaking about the benghazi incident, so its impossible for him to be referring to both or all?
Then, for the next 4 weeks, he calls it a VIDEO PROTEST that was SPONTANEOUS. He gives a speech 2 weeks later calling the Benghazi attack the cause of a despicable video.Every single video I've seen, everyone says "...as far as I/we/they know, it was a spontaneous attack" Or "from the information we have..." "...we don't jump to conclusions". This is STARKLY and grammatically different than "we know for sure this was a spontaneous attack" There is absolutely no debate about it. Clearly there is a breakdown in communication if you think the two are similar.


He NEVER EVER EVER calls it an act of terrorism specifically or even in the weeks afterwards.Except for the fact that he calls it an act of terror every single time he talks about it! LOL. IT DOESN'T MATTER whether it was a preplanned attack or a spontaneous one, they would both be acts of terrorism.


So, SOMEONE LIED TO HIM, WHICH MADE HIM LIE (unknowingly) TO THE AMERICAN PUBLIC. How do you not see that? The Video had NOTHING TO DO WITH THE ATTACK, THE VIDEO WAS RELEASED 6 MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK ON OUR EMBASSY.the video was produced in June and translated and uploaded to YouTube in September a week before the attack. I don't see the lies because I'm not witch hunting. If an investigation is being performed, information is going to change. If talking points are precursors to a cover up, then we should change the name of Fox News to Foxgate.


THEN this comes out today
Exclusive: Benghazi Talking Points Underwent 12 Revisions, Scrubbed of Terror Reference - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/)

OH LOOK ABC IS ACTUALLY REPORTING. ITS CLEAR HIlary and HIGHER are hiding something. The White House said only 1 word had been changed, now we find out its paragraphs 12 different times.
Which backs up everything I just said. Thank you.

You are witch hunting. You're arguing semantics. You are practicing selective outrage. You and the rest of the right media is looking for a scandal where there isn't one. You are Jumping to conclusions.

[David88vert]

Ive never said i dont support us getting the perpetrators? Ive seen no evidence that the Prez is committed to finding them though as we have probably long since lost the bad guys by now by over politicizing the issue.

The President has not lost them, as he is not the one searching for them. The FBI, CIA, etc, has these tasks. Let them have some time to do their jobs.

[David88vert]

I got "Page Not Available" when I tried to see the article from today on ABC.

[.blank cd]

If Obama didnt lie, then someone high up in his admin lied. I believe the latter. Someone in the State Dept / CIA was trying to protect his re-election
Its this right here is why it upsets me. It's perverse, its disgusting. Thinking that someone was trying to protect his election, despite there not being any evidence for it. It's called "politicization of the deaths of 4 individuals"

[David88vert]

Its this right here is why it upsets me. It's perverse, its disgusting. Thinking that someone was trying to protect his election, despite there not being any evidence for it. It's called "politicization of the deaths of 4 individuals"

I actually kind of agree here, but there is actually more to it. IF Obama had simply called it a terrorist act on Day 1, when they didn't really know what it was (I'm sure that they had suspicions), and called for justice (visualize Jesse Jackson style here), then he could have exploited it politically with ease. The way he chose to address it gives the appearance to me that he was not really trying to exploit it in a political manner, and why I think that it is just an error, and shouldn't be a big deal in regards to how we look at him. It is definitely not a reason for impeachment, like some have called for.

[BanginJimmy]

Let me be perfectly clear on my opinions on this.

1. Obama was not involved in the changing of the talking points. I believe that was done by his campaign staff, or at least under their orders. This includes the UN speech.
2. Since the info has started to trickle out, I do believe Obama is currently involved in the coverup. He knows who changed the talking points and why they were changed.
3. I believe the Obama admin did not come completely clean after the election because of politics. Everyone knows that Clinton is the front runner for the Whore House in '16. This could damage her beyond repair.
4. If there isnt some type of coverup at the State Dept, why are all the witnesses using private lawyers and not state dept ones? Why are there so many stories about intimidation? Why have we not heard the recordings from the coms between the FAST team and SOCOM?

[.blank cd]

Let me be perfectly clear on my opinions on this.

1. Obama was not involved in the changing of the talking points. I believe that was done by his campaign staff, or at least under their orders. This includes the UN speech.
2. Since the info has started to trickle out, I do believe Obama is currently involved in the coverup. He knows who changed the talking points and why they were changed.
3. I believe the Obama admin did not come completely clean after the election because of politics. Everyone knows that Clinton is the front runner for the Whore House in '16. This could damage her beyond repair.
What evidence is there, other than the current conjecture that keeps floating around, that this was a cover up? Obama had a mathematical advantage of winning before election season even started. Those people who would be interested in a fake scandal like this were not likely to vote for him anyways. If it was a cover up, his cover was blown in a matter of days, and he still won by a significant margin. And if it was a cover up, you would not know it was a cover up. The only person this hurts is Clinton's chances of election in 2016. And I doubt this will even have an effect that far out. No ones getting impeached. No one is gonna get canned other than the people that already quit.

Media circus. Grab your pitchforks, we're drumming up controversy. And part of me doesn't even think they're doing it on purpose. I believe some of them actually believe there's a controversy, and some just want to burn down the administration for whatever reason. With each subsequent circus attraction, GOP digs theirselves deeper and deeper into obscurity. Hopefully so much that a moderate faction emerges which pushes the democrats back left of right center.


4. If there isnt some type of coverup at the State Dept, why are all the witnesses using private lawyers and not state dept ones? Why are there so many stories about intimidation? Why have we not heard the recordings from the coms between the FAST team and SOCOM?Are they not allowed to have personal attorneys now?

[BanginJimmy]

What evidence is there, other than the current conjecture that keeps floating around, that this was a cover up? Obama had a mathematical advantage of winning before election season even started. Those people who would be interested in a fake scandal like this were not likely to vote for him anyways. If it was a cover up, his cover was blown in a matter of days, and he still won by a significant margin. And if it was a cover up, you would not know it was a cover up. The only person this hurts is Clinton's chances of election in 2016. And I doubt this will even have an effect that far out. No ones getting impeached. No one is gonna get canned other than the people that already quit.

Media circus. Grab your pitchforks, we're drumming up controversy. And part of me doesn't even think they're doing it on purpose. I believe some of them actually believe there's a controversy, and some just want to burn down the administration for whatever reason. With each subsequent circus attraction, GOP digs theirselves deeper and deeper into obscurity. Hopefully so much that a moderate faction emerges which pushes the democrats back left of right center.

Changed talking points.
Protests fabricated out of thin air.
Reported intimidation of State officials.
Lies from all over the administration.

Isnt the point of an investigation to find out what happened?


Wait, I thought you were a centrist? If that is true, why would you want to push the dems even further left than they already are? I guess a little bit of truth finally slipped out.


Are they not allowed to have personal attorneys now?

Of course they are. But it is certainly possible they want personal ones because they are going to give testimony that contradicts senior State appointees.

[.blank cd]

Changed talking points.New information is recieved, talking points change. Not a cover up. Fox News does this all the time. But to be fair, they're trying to cover up the fact that they're not actually news.


Protests fabricated out of thin air.So now there's no protests?


Reported intimidation of State officialsWe all see how that turned out. Whistle blowers ended up being shitty people from the get go.


Lies from all over the administration.Where?


Isnt the point of an investigation to find out what happened?Yep. But this is a witch hunt.


Wait, I thought you were a centrist? If that is true, why would you want to push the dems even further left than they already are? I guess a little bit of truth finally slipped out.What truth slipped out? That all we have is a choice between center right and far right when we go to the polls? I've said, everyones said this a million times. What's new? That since I'm forced to choose between shit and shittier, that Id rather them both offer ideas and solutions instead of one trying to tear down the other for no reason?


Of course they are. But it is certainly possible they want personal ones because they are going to give testimony that contradicts senior State appointees.Or its certainly possible that they can afford to hire personal attorneys. Or maybe its cause a state attorney might cause a conflict of interest. I don't know. Doesn't point to a cover up though.

[David88vert]

...That all we have is a choice between center right and far right when we go to the polls? I've said, everyones said this a million times. What's new? That since I'm forced to choose between shit and shittier, that Id rather them both offer ideas and solutions instead of one trying to tear down the other for no reason?


Obama and Romney?
Then you mean that Obama is "center right" to you, and that Romney is "far right"? If so, then you definitely are "extreme left" if Obama is "center right" to your position.

[.blank cd]

Obama and Romney?
Then you mean that Obama is "center right" to you, and that Romney is "far right"? If so, then you definitely are "extreme left" if Obama is "center right" to your position.
Proving once again you make up your own left right paradigm. He is center right based on his governing history and based on what he says his beliefs are.

[David88vert]

Proving once again you make up your own left right paradigm. He is center right based on his governing history and based on what he says his beliefs are.

Obama, center-right? Only European Socialists or Far Left Liberals see him as center-right.
Center-right then includes those who tend to think that on controversial issues the market is likely to work to the exclusion of the government, center-left tends to think that the government can play a significant role. Obama is center-left on pragmatic grounds - and that's being generous. The only way that you could attempt to put Obama in center-right is if you were comparing using Hitler and Mussolini and Franco on the far right, and Stalin and Lenin on the far left (Europe, not USA, get it?).
The extreme lefty's are Kerry and the Kennedys. Oh yeah, who did he recently appoint to Secretary of State?

[.blank cd]

Obama, center-right? Only European Socialists or Far Left Liberals see him as center-right.
Center-right then includes those who tend to think that on controversial issues the market is likely to work to the exclusion of the government, center-left tends to think that the government can play a significant role. Obama is center-left on pragmatic grounds - and that's being generous. The only way that you could attempt to put Obama in center-right is if you were comparing using Hitler and Mussolini and Franco on the far right, and Stalin and Lenin on the far left (Europe, not USA, get it?).
The extreme lefty's are Kerry and the Kennedys. Oh yeah, who did he recently appoint to Secretary of State?

Revisionist facts. You should write a book on them.

Its ok. I understand you feel you have the right to put Obama where you want when you believe you can move the goal posts wherever you want.

[David88vert]

Revisionist facts. You should write a book on them.

Its ok. I understand you feel you have the right to put Obama where you want when you believe you can move the goal posts wherever you want.

Actually, it's Obama that is trying to move the goal posts. His populist agenda is specifically attempting to redefine the political center to the left, just as Reagan redefined it back in the 1980s.

Victors revision history, not people like you and me. I simply point out facts, some of which are recent and obvious, but I don't change the facts - that's the job of the current Administration.

BTW - Have you ever heard, "Hindsight is 20/20?"

[Vteckidd]

LOL this is just funny, blank has officially turned into a brick wall.

[Vteckidd]

He wants to act like anything he posts is gospel, define what YOUR beliefs are, no no no TELL You what is right and left based upon his beliefs, ignore facts, and make fun of anything he doesnt understand.

You cannot argue with someone who has multiple ways of excusing himself from the debate. If you post facts, he will say its RIGHT WING LIES, if you post Videos, he will report on the 3 words he wants to see not the entire 5 minute paragraph, if you get technical, he acts like hes more intelligent than you.

Youll never win.

At least I can say when someone makes a valid point ill listen.

[.blank cd]

Never said any facts are right wing lies. Ever. If it seems like I've become a brick wall it's due to the rampant conversion of opinion to fact around here. If I tell you 2+2=4, I'm gonna be pretty brick walled about it because 2+2 doesn't equal anything else.

[Echonova]

Edit: Gah... Missed where it was posted earlier.



Nothing to see here.

[Sinfix_15]

Blank has always been a self absorbed far left liberal elitist......

only difference now is that we have got him to open up and reveal himself.

[Sinfix_15]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BJ_iwf4CEAEEJ-E.jpg:large

[Echonova]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHNl9O2iDdk

[Sinfix_15]

ABC,CBS,CNN top executives have siblings or spouses working for Obama (http://www.fireandreamitchell.com/2013/05/12/abc-cbs-cnn-top-executives-all-have-siblings-or-spouses-working-directly-for-obama/)

[.blank cd]

Welp. Pack your stuff up boys, lets go home. Sinfix cracked the case.

[.blank cd]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHNl9O2iDdk

And that has to be one of the most blatant misuses of context I've ever seen. Lol. No wonder Romney lost.

[Sinfix_15]

Welp. Pack your stuff up boys, lets go home. Sinfix cracked the case.

It's pretty transparent and obvious to anyone who doesnt have their head buried in the sand. Our constitution was meant to protect us from today.... from this type of government. Like every other tyrant in world history had devoted supporters who believed in that cause... here stands you.... devoted to these tyrants. Fully devoted to their propaganda. Our country will never fall to force, but it will be infected by people like you infecting others to believe this is "progress".

[.blank cd]

It's pretty transparent and obvious to anyone who doesnt have their head buried in the sand. Our constitution was meant to protect us from today.... from this type of government. Like every other tyrant in world history had devoted supporters who believed in that cause... here stands you.... devoted to these tyrants. Fully devoted to their propaganda.If there was a tyrant in place, I'd be right there with you. But since there isn't, it would seem that you're using the word "tyrant" in place of "someone I vehemently disagree with because I refuse to understand his position", thereby further devaluing the word "tyrant". So until you post something with a little intellectual avoirdupois, that is, something you've taken the time to critically analyze on both sides of an issue, with facts, then I'm gonna assume you're not interested interested in the truth, just in posting stupid shit to smear Obama. He isn't a tyrant at all. History and examples of actual tyrants would disagree with you. You're quick to compare him with the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mousellini, Pot, and others, but this is only because you're left with no options, no intellectual rebuttal. When you are dismissed with actual facts, you put up psychological defense mechanisms (i.e. pretending the education system is liberalized, or anyone who disagrees with you is "liberal") to avoid cognitive dissonance (thats that feeling you get in your head when you realize Im always right, but the new, correct information conflicts with your preconceived ideas) I know how you work, Sinfix. It's a pattern, and you're very effective at repeating it. Try something new.

Sore losers. It's no wonder the Republican Party is dissolving. Rather than accept defeat (by a black man in a predominately white institution, yeah I said it) and change their image and become the fiscally and socially responsible party they once were, they keep digging their heels deeper into crazy and marginalizing themselves. They are literally made up of sociopaths. And I'm not talking about crazy murderous individuals and what pop-culture defines as sociopaths, I'm taking about people that could really be clinically diagnosed with dissocial personality disorder.


Our country will never fall to force, but it will be infected by people like you infecting others to believe this is "progress".I sure as hell hope so. Lol.

[Sinfix_15]

If there was a tyrant in place, I'd be right there with you. But since there isn't, it would seem that you're using the word "tyrant" in place of "someone I vehemently disagree with because I refuse to understand his position", thereby further devaluing the word "tyrant". So until you post something with a little intellectual avoirdupois, that is, something you've taken the time to critically analyze on both sides of an issue, with facts, then I'm gonna assume you're not interested interested in the truth, just in posting stupid shit to smear Obama. He isn't a tyrant at all. History and examples of actual tyrants would disagree with you. You're quick to compare him with the likes of Hitler, Stalin, Mousellini, Pot, and others, but this is only because you're left with no options, no intellectual rebuttal. When you are dismissed with actual facts, you put up psychological defense mechanisms (i.e. pretending the education system is liberalized, or anyone who disagrees with you is "liberal") to avoid cognitive dissonance (thats that feeling you get in your head when you realize Im always right, but the new, correct information conflicts with your preconceived ideas) I know how you work, Sinfix. It's a pattern, and you're very effective at repeating it. Try something new.

Sore losers. It's no wonder the Republican Party is dissolving. Rather than accept defeat (by a black man in a predominately white institution, yeah I said it) and change their image and become the fiscally and socially responsible party they once were, they keep digging their heels deeper into crazy and marginalizing themselves. They are literally made up of sociopaths. And I'm not talking about crazy murderous individuals and what pop-culture defines as sociopaths, I'm taking about people that could really be clinically diagnosed with dissocial personality disorder.

I sure as hell hope so. Lol.

Is Karl Marx a tyrant?


There's no need for you to keep confirming your political stance. We're all well aware of how tightly you fall inline with this regime and how delusional you are about the righteousness of their cause. You keep proclaiming that you're "always right" while everyone else labels you as a delusional fool. I see you for the fool that you are. You chose to be a fool. Why you're such a fool is up for debate.

[.blank cd]

Is Karl Marx a tyrant?Did you just ask this seriously?



There's no need for you to keep confirming your political stance. We're all well aware of how tightly you fall inline with this regime and how delusional you are about the righteousness of their cause. You keep proclaiming that you're "always right" while everyone else labels you as a delusional fool. I see you for the fool that you are. You chose to be a fool. Why you're such a fool is up for debate.You call me a fool, and in the same post suggested Karl Marx is a tyrant. Gotcha. LOL

[Sinfix_15]

Did you just ask this seriously?


You call me a fool, and in the same post suggested Karl Marx is a tyrant. Gotcha. LOL

Didnt mean to insult one of your heroes. Apologies.

[.blank cd]

Didnt mean to insult one of your heroes. Apologies.

Do you understand yet why no one takes you seriously?

Do you know who Karl Marx even is, or what his work even consists of?

I'm guessing since you're pretty staunch in your criticism of Marx, you must have studied his work. What about his work do you disagree with?

Does that cognitive dissonance hurt?

[.blank cd]

Sinfix: "Well, the media says Marxism is bad and Obama is a Marxist"



Lets see what his answer is. Probably gonna evade the question somehow. Lol.

[Sinfix_15]

Do you understand yet why no one takes you seriously?

Does that cognitive dissonance hurt?

In the world we currently live in, i take pride in not being accepted. Seeing a world where being on food stamps and relying on government to take care of you is normal makes me sick to my fucking stomach. I dont expect you to take me seriously.... we might as well be speaking different languages. You're trying to sell me an idea that i want no part of. I would rather live on an island by myself and never have any other human contact than join in your welfare entitlement society that wants to spend their entire lives sucking on the government's titty. The things you stand for are trash, yet you have the audacity to look down on other people. It's no wonder you're so emotionally attached to this president, you're the same arrogant and delusional shit bag that he is.

[Sinfix_15]

Sinfix: "Well, the media says Marxism is bad and Obama is a Marxist"



Lets see what his answer is. Probably gonna evade the question somehow. Lol.

Socialism breeds dictators.

[.blank cd]

In the world we currently live in, i take pride in not being accepted. Seeing a world where being on food stamps and relying on government to take care of you is normal makes me sick to my fucking stomach. I dont expect you to take me seriously.... we might as well be speaking different languages. You're trying to sell me an idea that i want no part of. I would rather live on an island by myself and never have any other human contact than join in your welfare entitlement society that wants to spend their entire lives sucking on the government's titty. The things you stand for are trash, yet you have the audacity to look down on other people. It's no wonder you're so emotionally attached to this president, you're the same arrogant and delusional shit bag that he is.
Except I hate those same things. It just doesn't justify us getting rid of it. Public assistance has been a thing since before you were born and its not going away anytime soon. You'll be a part of it until the day you die.

If you don't want to be a part of the idea of trying to understand policy and economics, then why even post in this section?

[.blank cd]

Socialism breeds dictators.

False.

You suggested Karl Marx is a tyrant. Is he a tyrant or not?

[Sinfix_15]

Except I hate those same things. It just doesn't justify us getting rid of it. Public assistance has been a thing since before you were born and its not going away anytime soon. You'll be a part of it until the day you die.

If you don't want to be a part of the idea of trying to understand policy and economics, then why even post in this section?

I dont want to understand it. I want to oppose it. You and everyone like you who support Obama and liberal policies are fools. I will think of you as fools and call you fools "until the day i die" or until things change.

[Sinfix_15]

False.

You suggested Karl Marx is a tyrant. Is he a tyrant or not?

False says you...... because you have selective memory loss when it comes to history.

Karl Marx is the worst kind of tyrant the world has ever known. You can kill an enemy soldier, shoot down a plane or rocket, blow up a tank..... but it's a lot more difficult to counter attack the ideology infection of someone like Karl Marx. America will never fall to a "physical tyrant" by force.... ideology is the biggest threat to our way of life. Yes, without firing a single shot...... Karl Marx is a tyrant. Convincing people that theyre not being ruled over doesnt make them any less ruled over, it's simply more effective.

Socialism fuels dictatorships. The government cant give anything to anyone without first taking it. A government big enough to give you everything you need is big enough to take everything you've got. Simple truths..... proven by history, that delusional fools like you refuse to accept.

[bu villain]

I think you are a little off the beaten path with that definition of tyrant. What makes Karl Marx any more of a tyrant than Adam Smith by your definition?

[.blank cd]

I dont want to understand it. I want to oppose it. You and everyone like you who support Obama and liberal policies are fools. I will think of you as fools and call you fools "until the day i die" or until things change.

How do you oppose something you don't understand?

[.blank cd]

I think you are a little off the beaten path with that definition of tyrant. What makes Karl Marx any more of a tyrant than Adam Smith by your definition?

Don't expect a serious answer to this. He doesn't understand who Karl Marx or Adam Smith is. Fox News says they're socialist communist tyrants and that's all that matters to people like him.

[Vteckidd]

Admin caught in a big lie. They lied about what was changed and deliberately hid info. Someone is going to take the fall for that.

IRS acting rogue, now DOJ implicated in new scandal going after HOR but not senate. HOR IS GOP CONTROLLED.
Chicago politics at its finest.

[Echonova]

No need to worry, the Government will get to the bottom of all this and deal with the infidels... Nothing to see here.

After Benghazi, IRS tea party probe: Govt seized AP phone records (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/benghazi-irs-tea-party-probe-govt-seized-ap-221531096.html)

[BanginJimmy]

Admin caught in a big lie. They lied about what was changed and deliberately hid info. Someone is going to take the fall for that.

IRS acting rogue, now DOJ implicated in new scandal going after HOR but not senate. HOR IS GOP CONTROLLED.
Chicago politics at its finest.


No need to worry, the Government will get to the bottom of all this and deal with the infidels... Nothing to see here.

After Benghazi, IRS tea party probe: Govt seized AP phone records (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/ticket/benghazi-irs-tea-party-probe-govt-seized-ap-221531096.html)


Obama and his admin need to be very careful here. He is pushing the press that loves him so much WAY beyond anyone has ever pushed them. I have heard reporters on both the left and right say the same thing, dont lie to the press, dont try to bully the press. Push them too far, they will push back. With everything going on with the House GOP, he needs the press to stay firmly in his corner, the last thing he needs is the press digging up dirt on their own.

[Sinfix_15]

How do you oppose something you don't understand?

Says you. My respect for your opinion dwindles by the day.

[Sinfix_15]

I think you are a little off the beaten path with that definition of tyrant. What makes Karl Marx any more of a tyrant than Adam Smith by your definition?

"When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."

"Single acts of tyranny may be ascribed to the accidental opinion of a day; but a series of oppressions ... too plainly prove a deliberate, systematical plan of reducing us to slavery."

"I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."

-Thomas Jefferson



I look at it like this. A cat in the wild can hunt it's own food and sustain itself. It doesnt need anything but it's own ability to survive. I take a cat as a pet, feed it, take care of it, declaw it. This cat doesnt try to escape, it comes to it's food bowl and otherwise stays where i keep it. This cat, now domesticated, would not make it in the wild if i released it. If it had kittens, they wouldnt even know what the outside is. They would be completely unaware that they are my pets and would think being locked inside my house and fed in a bowl by me is normal, just the way life was suppose to be. Ultimately, i now control this cat and this cat's survival is heavily reliant on me continuing to take care of it.

Force is not the only means of oppressing someone, nor is it the most effective. Karl Marx's ideology is oppression. He tried to convince people that the food bowl was better than the wild. As our government grows in power, it steadily tries to convince you that you need less power. The fact that some people agree with them and are happy staying on the couch with a food bowl doesnt make it any less oppressive.

"every form of tyranny over the mind of man"

[.blank cd]

Says you. My respect for your opinion dwindles by the day.

I'm asking you a question. How do you oppose something you don't understand?

[Sinfix_15]

I'm asking you a question. How do you oppose something you don't understand?

I understand. It's the infatuation with your own opinion that leads you to believing anyone who doesnt agree with you is ignorant. It's you who cant see the forest for the trees. You're the worst kind of fool, a delusional one.

[Sinfix_15]

So you think i dont understand socialism?

but if somehow i magically had the brain power of the almighty and all knowing Blankcd so that i could fully understand socialism and all of it's glory that there's absolutely no way humanly possible that i could still be opposed to it?

[Sinfix_15]

in before the "you dont want police, fireman or a military?" argument begins.

[.blank cd]

So you think i dont understand socialism?

but if somehow i magically had the brain power of the almighty and all knowing Blankcd so that i could fully understand socialism and all of it's glory that there's absolutely no way humanly possible that i could still be opposed to it?No. I don't think you understand what socialism is.

What I mean is how do you oppose something when you don't know what it is you're opposing?

How do you support something when you don't know what it is supporting?

Do you think because the all knowing pundits give you a quick rundown on what socialism is, that its actually what they say it is? What have you read by Karl Marx or John Keynes do you particularly disagree with?

[Sinfix_15]

Politics: Obama vs. America | CainTV (http://www.caintv.com/obama-vs.america)

[Sinfix_15]

No. I don't think you understand what socialism is.

What I mean is how do you oppose something when you don't know what it is you're opposing?

How do you support something when you don't know what it is supporting?

Do you think because the all knowing pundits give you a quick rundown on what socialism is, that its actually what they say it is? What have you read by Karl Marx or John Keynes do you particularly disagree with?

If i based my opinions on what the media had to say, i'd be an Obama leg humping sheep just like you. I know Karl Marx is one of your heroes, i can only imagine how offended you must be.

[.blank cd]

If i based my opinions on what the media had to say, i'd be an Obama leg humping sheep just like you. I know Karl Marx is one of your heroes, i can only imagine how offended you must be.Thank you for avoiding the question. That's all I needed to know.

Just for clarities sake, since you don't base your opinion on what the media has to say, what is your opinion on what happened in Benghazi, with respect to Obamas involvement?

[Sinfix_15]

Thank you for avoiding the question. That's all I needed to know.

Just for clarities sake, since you don't base your opinion on what the media has to say, what is your opinion on what happened in Benghazi, with respect to Obamas involvement?

Benghazi happened a long time ago..... right?

Obama is an incompetent fool who was never fit to be president in the first place. He said and done whatever was needed to obtain power and will say and do anything to keep it. I don't believe Obama is innocently unaware of all the scandal taking place around him, but even if he is..... that shows he is, at the very least, incompetent. Obama valued being re-elected over anything else, he would have told any lie or covered up any self diminishing truth to make that happen. Like you and most every other liberal in existence, you think your reality is worth lying for. That the ends justifies the means. You don't care if you have to lie to get your way as long as you get your way. I think Obama's hands are on everything, but he has no shortage of people willing to take the fall for him. Given the degree that this administration has safeguarded itself, even though they claimed to be "the most transparent government in history", it may take a while for the full truth to come out..... if it ever does. Even though Obama himself is a worthless sack of shit, the truth may stay hidden simply to protect the position of president. Hopefully the next president does a good job of helping us forget this black mark on american history (No pun intended).

I dont think an american embassy gets attacked without the president being notified. I think whatever conversation happened was on behalf of protecting the campaign and not the ambassador.

[.blank cd]

Gotcha. And how did you come to this opinion?

[Sinfix_15]

Gotcha. And how did you come to this opinion?



http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2009/04/tinfoil_hat_antenna.jpg

[Sinfix_15]

White House Relies on Incompetence Defense as IRS, AP Scandals Grow (http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/05/14/white-house-relies-on-incomptence-defense-as-scandals-grow?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

[.blank cd]

http://scienceblogs.com/startswithabang/files/2009/04/tinfoil_hat_antenna.jpg

This is probably very close to the truth.

[Sinfix_15]

This is probably very close to the truth.

You hear what you want to hear anyways, might as well cut to the chase and feed your elitist perception of anyone who disagrees with you. One day you will realize that you were on the wrong side of history and hopefully when that day comes you will remember all the times that i called you a fool and come to realization that i was right.

[Sinfix_15]

A recap of Jay Carney's press conference

http://imperialscatering.com/yahoo_site_admin/assets/images/RoastedPig.206113526.jpg

[Sinfix_15]

Eric Holder just hung himself................................


"I'm proud of what we've done" - Eric Holder 5/14/2013

[Sinfix_15]

Reporter Claims IRS Harassment After Tough Obama Interview | The Dana Show (http://danaloeschradio.com/reporter-claims-irs-harassment-after-tough-obama-interview/)

[Vteckidd]

Washington Post (http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-he-called-benghazi-an-act-of-terrorism/2013/05/13/7b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html)

Not exactly fox news

[Vteckidd]

The EPA and IRS scandals are going to motivate people to abolish Obamacare. This is what absolute power does to a govt.

[.blank cd]

Reporter Claims IRS Harassment After Tough Obama Interview | The Dana Show (http://danaloeschradio.com/reporter-claims-irs-harassment-after-tough-obama-interview/)

Quoted from the article

"What I don’t like to even consider … is that because of the Obama interview … the IRS put a target on me.
Can I prove it? At this time, no."

Dismissed.

[.blank cd]

Washington Post (http://m.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/obamas-claim-he-called-benghazi-an-act-of-terrorism/2013/05/13/7b65b83e-bc14-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_blog.html)

Not exactly fox news

Not Fox News. Somehow worse

What is it about the president calling the benghazi attack an act of terror that the collective right refuses to understand? Do they want the "ism"? How many times does he have to call it an act of terror before they realize he called it an act of terror? Lol

[Sinfix_15]

Quoted from the article

"What I don’t like to even consider … is that because of the Obama interview … the IRS put a target on me.
Can I prove it? At this time, no."

Dismissed.

The burden of proof now lies on the government.

[.blank cd]

The burden of proof now lies on the government.

How do you figure that? Reporter made the claim. The burden of proof rests on him. Plain and simple.

[Sinfix_15]

How do you figure that? Reporter made the claim. The burden of proof rests on him. Plain and simple.

you seem to have missed the part where the IRS has admitted to this, so let me bring you up to date on current events. The IRS has admitted to this.

We're all aware that you're "ride or die" Obama.... but watch what is about to start happening.... realizing this ship is sinking and with nothing politically to be gained by sticking by Obama's side, everyone is about to start lifting the curtain and distancing themselves from this buffoon.

[.blank cd]

you seem to have missed the part where the IRS has admitted to this, so let me bring you up to date on current events. The IRS has admitted to this.

Ok. From all the articles Ive read, the IRS hasn't admitted anything. An apology is not an admission of guilt. So the IRS has admitted to targeting this particular reporter? And he still says he can't prove it?

Hmmmmmm.

[Sinfix_15]

Ok. From all the articles Ive read, the IRS hasn't admitted anything. An apology is not an admission of guilt. So the IRS has admitted to targeting this particular reporter? And he still says he can't prove it?

Hmmmmmm.

With the "most transparent government in history" fighting relentlessly to keep all of their dirty secrets, secrets.... how would one go about proving this? Obama's administration has gone to great lengths to remove anyone's power to pin anything on them. That way they can sit on their perch and call everyone a liar.

[Sinfix_15]

They finally made the mistake of biting the hand that feeds them................................ the liberal media has glorified this shit president since day one.... ignored his failure and supported his lies....

Now theyre gonna start asking the questions they should have been asking for 5 years.

[.blank cd]

With the "most transparent government in history" fighting relentlessly to keep all of their dirty secrets, secrets.... how would one go about proving this? Obama's administration has gone to great lengths to remove anyone's power to pin anything on them. That way they can sit on their perch and call everyone a liar.

I'm sure all these conservative bloggers and pundits and "reporters" and "journalists" with their aptitude for "uncovering the truth" should have no problem proving it.

[bu villain]

"When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty."...I look at it like this. A cat in the wild can hunt it's own food and sustain itself....

That's all fine and good but writing about a system which you believe would lead to tyranny if enacted, does not make the writer a tyrant.

[Sinfix_15]

I'm sure all these conservative bloggers and pundits and "reporters" and "journalists" with their aptitude for "uncovering the truth" should have no problem proving it.

I'm sure the truth will be easy to find with the government being so willing to cooperate with this truth seeking mission.

Obama Pursuing Leakers Sends Warning to Whistle-Blowers - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-10-18/obama-pursuing-leakers-sends-warning-to-whistle-blowers.html)

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/12/us/politics/12leak.html?pagewanted=1&_r=0

[Vteckidd]

The Washington Post is now turning on Obama Admin because the lies are so bad, they cant ignore them anymore. Did you read the article I linked you too? Hes boxed himself into a corner and you cant see it. Its kinda funny.

He cant say its a Youtube video, then claim he said it was a terrorist attack, or vice versa. He knows he cant because his underlings are now all being questioned because someone lied outright about what happened that night. THey lied about changing the talking points, they lied about what caused this attack and who did it.

The question remains, WHY?

[Vteckidd]

The IRS , DOJ, an EPA are now all being implicated in operating in a political manner , this is Chicago Politics at its finest. This is what the Obama machine has always been about

[BanginJimmy]

Ok. From all the articles Ive read, the IRS hasn't admitted anything. An apology is not an admission of guilt. So the IRS has admitted to targeting this particular reporter? And he still says he can't prove it?

Hmmmmmm.


Actually they have.
IRS admits to improperly targeting conservative groups - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-irs-improperly-targeting-conservatives-20130510,0,7187034.story)

Is the LA Times liberal enough for you to believe it or do I need to go further left to find a source you will believe?

I find this article very telling. NBC is actually making excuses for the IRS, saying that manpower was the reason for the added investigations.
As applications swell, IRS nonprofit division overloaded, understaffed - Open Channel (http://openchannel.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/14/18238920-as-applications-swell-irs-nonprofit-division-overloaded-understaffed?lite)


Proof that the IRS was acting in a political manner, thus proving it wasnt a couple low level employees trying to save time.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/299621--report-irs-leaked-confidential-documents-to-investigative-journalists

[Echonova]

^^^ I didn't bother to read the article. Because I completely understand taking on additional work when I'm already over-worked and under-staffed. Makes total sense.

[Sinfix_15]

Progressive Group Admits IRS Gave Them Conservative Groups' Confidential Documents - Heather Ginsberg (http://townhall.com/tipsheet/heatherginsberg/2013/05/14/progressive-group-admits-irs-gave-them-conservative-groups-confidential-documents-n1596810?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter)

[Vteckidd]

Newly Released Benghazi Emails Directly Contradict White House Claims | The Weekly Standard (http://m.weeklystandard.com/blogs/newly-released-benghazi-emails-directly-contradict-white-house-claims_724603.html)

More lies...

[Browning151]

Jay Carney finally tells the truth.........









https://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/942194_452428631508329_1150905168_n.jpg

[Sinfix_15]

Obama’s Secret to Corruption: Never Appoint a Special Counsel (http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/55307#.UZjYZ0x1IP4.twitter)

[Sinfix_15]

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/BLt-k2iCUAAtMyL.jpg:large

[Echonova]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL_mEYP8N-A

[Sinfix_15]

http://static4.fjcdn.com/thumbnails/comments/What+has+been+seen+cannot+be+unseen+_2e6437db91489 16956925d4c24f22d95.jpeg

[Echonova]

It's a popular song in Egypt right now.

[CarlosDanger]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WL_mEYP8N-AAfter watching this, I am all for the Burqa.

[Echonova]

Good thing Al Qaeda is decimated and on the run.

FIRST ON CNN: U.S. pulls diplomats from Lahore amid terror threat - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/world/asia/pakistan-us-consulate-evacuated/index.html)