calfoxwc Posted October 20, 2012 Report Share Posted October 20, 2012 and all the little self interest dimwits just parrot the crap again and again. EXCELLENT post, the previous one... they don't care about truth - their selfish, dishonest self interest is served by creating falsehoods to manipulate public opinion... "perception is reality"... http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/our-fearless-misleader_653228.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 If you watched the debate tonight I think you guys got your answer on Libya: recent releases of the intelligence the administration was working off of has shown that the whole "scandal" notion is just bogus. Schieffer laid it up there right for Romney in the first question and Romney passed on Libya completely. He knew it'd get thrown right back in his face. I wonder how much the right will be pissed about that. They're really excited about the idea that this was some "scandal" or "cover up" and Romney obviously isn't on that page. Here's all Romney said on Libya: "We see in Libya an attack apparently by, I think we know now, by terrorists of some kind against our people there, [and] four people dead. Our hearts and minds go to them." Obama even brought up Libya later on to try and entice Romney back on to the subject, but Romney didn't bite. Interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 ^^^ for dummy Its called National Security, Romney was briefed and wasn't going to give away any information that may place operatives into harms way. Something that Obama has never done between him and duffooos Joe Biden who don't mind revealing secrets to spike footballs while exposing our members of the military. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Um, yeah, that was it. Hannity is going ballistic about this on Fox. He just spent a half hour wondering why it wasn't brought up. Castellanos is on CNN saying he's getting emails from conservatives who aren't too pleased that the moderate from Massachusetts is in full effect, and that this is what they were always worried about - that Romney was just pretending to be a conservative. (Of course he was.) After all, he just went out there and said "the biggest presidential failure" is ....basically right about everything, more or less. Shorter Romney: I'd do the same things Obama's doing, but better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Meanwhile, two different ex-intel officers are insisting, that as a fact, they had a drone over the area , and they watched REAL TIME the attack. And Obamao did nothing. And insisted for two weeks that there were protests, about the video. That's a scandal. Obamao is a liar. He is. At one point in the debate, ObaMao said everything Romney said was not true. He also said that Romney had no different ideas than him, because Romney agreed. That is another stupidass mistake. Another lie was the denial of OBamao about wanting to keep a contingency force in Iraq. Joe Biden was IN CHARGE OF IT, but it fell through. It's sad that so many like heckbunker don't care about our country - it's all about their leftist anti everything side winning by any means necessary, Take the threats by the left seriously, America. They mean it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Cal, are you mad Romney didn't raise the Bengazi issue? I keep hearing from Republican friends and they're all puzzled and/or angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 Actually this 1 is fairly obvious. the Presidents sole foreign policy achievements, and a dubious 1 it is, is the fact that he assassinated Osama bin Laden. Certainly that's a feel good moment just your for those of us in the US, but not so much in the Middle East. I think he kind of Embellished the moment by bragging over and over that he had decimated Alqaeda and they were on the run. Apparently not. So it actually makes sense that they'd want to draw attention away from the Benghazi attack. If someone were to wish to make an ad it might be a good 1 to have a lot of clips of Obama bragging about defeating al queda over the video of them raising the AQ flag over that burning embassy. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 WALLACE: We're going to -- Senator Graham, we're going to get to the accounts, the shifting accounts in a moment. But I want to press my question with you, again, Senator Durbin, because you didn't really answer it. Why didn't -- with all of the warnings, I mean, we had repeated memos from the ambassador, and repeated requests from the security team on the ground, why didn't the administration do more to protect these people in Benghazi? DURBIN: You know, that question is going to be answered, Chris, when we gather the information together. But let me also -- fromFox news Sunday under siege for months before attack on 9/11 4 dead..... still doubletalk from Durbin pretty obvious - this will play out on the POTUS and it will hang him all by itself imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted October 23, 2012 Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 If someone were to wish to make an ad it might be a good 1 to have a lot of clips of Obama bragging about defeating okay to over top of the video of them raising the LK to flag over that burning embassy. WSS include the remarks of Kerry and Biden at the DNC convention..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 23, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 23, 2012 If someone were to wish to make an ad it might be a good 1 to have a lot of clips of Obama bragging about defeating okay to over top of the video of them raising the LK to flag over that burning embassy. WSS include the remarks of Kerry and Biden at the DNC convention..... Good point hooker. if the press weren't in Obama's pocket this could and should be his " mission accomplished" moment. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 (Shakes head.) How is the press keeping the Romney campaign from putting out this supposedly devastating ad again? And when did Obama ever claim that he'd completely solved the jihadist/militant Muslim problem? Must have missed that. You can look at a list if you want. Of the top Al Qaeda operatives around the world, they've killed an awful lot of them. If Romney wants to bring up the president's most popular foreign policy accomplishment, Democrats are all for it. The fact that he doesn't, and instead said at last night's debate, " I don't blame the administration for the fact that the relationship with Pakistan is strained. We — we had to go into Pakistan. We had to go in there to get Osama bin Laden. That was the right thing to do." probably should tell you something. And later, "And — and we're going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda." That's your candidate, fellas... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 And here's his Libya answer: SCHIEFFER: The first question, and it concerns Libya. The controversy over what happened there continues. Four Americans are dead, including an American ambassador. Questions remain. What happened? What caused it? Was it spontaneous? Was it an intelligence failure? Was it a policy failure? Was there an attempt to mislead people about what really happened? Governor Romney, you said this was an example of an American policy in the Middle East that is unraveling before our very eyes. I'd like to hear each of you give your thoughts on that. Governor Romney, you won the toss. You go first. ROMNEY: Thank you, Bob. And thank you for agreeing to moderate this debate this evening. Thank you to Lynn University for welcoming us here. And Mr. President, it's good to be with you again. We were together at a humorous event a little earlier, and it's nice to maybe funny this time, not on purpose. We'll see what happens. This is obviously an area of great concern to the entire world, and to America in particular, which is to see a — a complete change in the — the structure and the — the environment in the Middle East. With the Arab Spring, came a great deal of hope that there would be a change towards more moderation, and opportunity for greater participation on the part of women in public life, and in economic life in the Middle East. But instead, we've seen in nation after nation, a number of disturbing events. Of course we see in Syria, 30,000 civilians having been killed by the military there. We see in — in Libya, an attack apparently by, I think we know now, by terrorists of some kind against — against our people there, four people dead. Our hearts and — and minds go out to them. Mali has been taken over, the northern part of Mali by al-Qaeda type individuals. We have in — in Egypt, a Muslim Brotherhood president. And so what we're seeing is a pretty dramatic reversal in the kind of hopes we had for that region. Of course the greatest threat of all is Iran, four years closer to a nuclear weapon. And — and we're going to have to recognize that we have to do as the president has done. I congratulate him on — on taking out Osama bin Laden and going after the leadership in al-Qaeda. ...That's all he said about Libya. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 And your point? Of course I think he should have hammered away at Obama's lies. But he didn't. He should have said it was an al queda attack too. But unlike you I don't have to defend every single solitary syllable the guy says. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 outright bullshit. He didn't say act of terror. (Yes, he did) That, as you know, wasn't the accusation. What you do know is how easy it is to win an argument if you make up with the other guy says! WSS You think Obama's drone strikes are swell. (No, I don't.) It's all I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Sorry heck. I hit edit instead of respond with quote. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 And when did Obama ever claim that he'd completely solved the jihadist/militant Muslim problem? Must have missed that. That was right after endorsing Islam as the state religion and right before mandating intro to marxism/fascism be taught in every elementary school classroom. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 outright bullshit. He didn't say act of terror. (Yes, he did) That, as you know, wasn't the accusation. What you do know is how easy it is to win an argument if you make up with the other guy says! WSS You think Obama's drone strikes are swell. (No, I don't.) It's all I do. I'll survive. But you're just grasping at straws. You were wrong on the whole "act of terror" question before. Now you're pretending that my quick summation is really me trying to distort the argument. We've gone over all of this before at length. Romney accused him of not calling it an act of terror for 14 days and it turned out he had three times in the first two days. Romney was wrong and so were you. Let's not nitpick. You've already lost that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Cal, are you mad Romney didn't raise the Bengazi issue? I keep hearing from Republican friends and they're all puzzled and/or angry. heck *********************** No. The Bengazi issue is all over the place now. That damage is being done. Even some before-Bengazi fans of Obamao, are now seriously looking at Bengazi as a hideous failure of leadership, and honest/extreme ignorance... by Obamao. Romney has now taken the lead in favorability over ObaMao. Obamao and Biden tried so desperately to get Ryan or Romney to lose their temper and make a major mistake. Instead, Romney and Ryan stayed presidential. That will get the independents even more, women more, and honestly, will get honest Democrat voters more. It's a win-win for them, and Biden/Obamao the Terrible lose. The polls show it. Question is, Heck, are you upset that Romney and Ryan avoided the intimidation trap? *************************** Woodward: Obama 'mistaken' on sequester... Obama Supporters Continue Threats To Riot, Assassinate Romney... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REPORT: Iran supplying Assad with ground convoys through Iraq... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- POLLS: ROMNEY TAKES LEAD IN FAVORABILITY... RASMUSSEN: R 50% O 46%... GALLUP: R 51% O 46%... 'NC gone. Is VA next?' GOP moves into Wisconsin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Obamao fraud is being displayed for all to see. It's very ugly. ******************************************* Woodward: Obama 'mistaken' on sequester... Obama Supporters Continue Threats To Riot, Assassinate Romney... -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- REPORT: Iran supplying Assad with ground convoys through Iraq... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 I'll survive. But you're just grasping at straws. You were wrong on the whole "act of terror" question before. Now you're pretending that my quick summation is really me trying to distort the argument. We've gone over all of this before at length. Romney accused him of not calling it an act of terror for 14 days and it turned out he had three times in the first two days. Romney was wrong and so were you. Let's not nitpick. You've already lost that one. But we're not nit picking. Part of the spin is the excuse that the president was told that it was A spontaneous demonstration over a video. Everyone save for the hardest left deniers know that was a lie. Or to be more gracious, a blunder. If in fact Obama knew all along it was an Al Qaeda attack he should have said so. And chastised is surrogates for propogating that misstatement. Just pick your excuse and run with it. A. He, and noone else, knew the truth from the minute it happened. If that's true a real leader would have called out the State Department and ci a for spreading false information. Also a real leader would have responded immediately to al Qaeda attack on US soil. B. He really didn't have any idea what had happened and was waiting for Intel to give him a basis. So if he did call it specifically an act of terror he was lying since he had no idea or Was speaking in generalities. C. The administration really was working on some specious is CIA report saying it was a video demonstration. But that misinformation came out after his speech. Personally I think he was speaking in generalities. The only case you can make, and it's a week 1, is that there was confusion across the board as to what happened and why. And all of it calculated so as not to be forced to admit that that the bravado and jingoism of the past few years have been A hollow boast. And hollow biasting was of the hallmarks of his presidential campaign four years ago. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Oh boy. Steve, your problem is that - with everything - you assume ill intentions from the very start. If it involves Democrats, you're already assuming they're cheating and lying. That's where you start from, and no matter what the evidence suggests. Which is how you make so many ridiculous conclusions. So you're the one who is denying the obvious conclusion. They got conflicting reports from the intelligence community and from the people on the ground. They've still got conflicting reports from the people on the ground. You cherry pick the ones you like and ignore the ones that don't make your case. Go look at all the statements they made. They all mention the evolving situation and talk about "the best information we have right now." For the first few days that information wasn't clear one way or the other. But I'm tired of arguing with you about this. You want to make it into Obama instructing everyone to lie to cover up ....something. I don't know. So go ahead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 And you don't have to post me the news about the email. I've seen it. Just assume Cal posted it, and then I tried to get him to calm down and acknowledge that when a group claims responsibility for something on Facebook that doesn't mean we run right out and give them their credit, but that we do our own investigation to find out what actually happened. That investigation gave us conflicting reports from the ground as to what happened and why. They're still some confusion as to what happened and why. I don't think the communication between the agencies and the White House was very good, but that was the problem. It's not some intricate lie that started in the White House political office. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Oh boy. Steve, your problem is that - with everything - you assume ill intentions from the very start. If it involves Democrats, you're already assuming they're cheating and lying. That's where you start from. That's how it works here. Your position is that Democrats are selfless honest and pure to a fault; caring of nothing except their fellow man. Oh well. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 No, actually not at all. You just don't get how anyone operates in the real world. And your opinions are always off because they're founded in resentment and spite. Once you throw in the misinformation, they're even further off. If anything, you're the one who assumes Republicans are perfect and wholesome. Like yesterday, when you couldn't see why Romney keeps talking about the need to build more ships at every campaign stop, and in every debate, and thought it was because he's genuinely concerned that the United States Navy doesn't have enough ships. "In 1916, the US controlled roughly 11% of the world’s naval power. This is an impressive number that ranks the US third in naval strength behind the UK (34%) and Germany (19%), and just ahead of France (10%). What about the US navy in 2011? In 2011, the US controlled roughly 50% of the world’s naval power putting it in a comfortable lead in naval power ahead of Russia (11%)." I mean, golly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FairHooker11 Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 If what Romney said about a needing a bigger Navy doesnt resonate with Obama, maybe the POTUS should listen to his own defense secretary?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 24, 2012 Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 In the same story that breaks the news and gives readers the e-mails, CBS News prints an unaired answer that Obama gave Steve Kroft on September 12. It was his first interview after the attacks. "You're right that this is not a situation that was -- exactly the same as what happened in Egypt and my suspicion is that there are folks involved in this who were looking to target Americans from the start." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 24, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 24, 2012 Oh boy. Steve, your problem is that - with everything - you assume ill intentions from the very start. If it involves Demots. Yeah I'm such a cynic. meanwhile you be rate Mitt Romney for having the audacity to call for a strong military during an election cycle and while the Presidents foreign policy is falling apart. How can i believe he mentioned something that the voters might want to hear. Blasphemy! Why don't you give me a list of Obama's campaign slogans and such that aren't a load of crap intended to get the suckers in the tent? Rebuild the middle class tax the rich Level the playing field fair share blah blah blah. Give me something I've heard in the last couple weeks that's not campaign related? And how the real world works? Papparazzi could make hundreds of thousands of dollars getting pictures of Madonna taking a shit. Yet her security is so tight you almost never see something her people havent approved. So you want me to believe that the Obama regime which controls literally trillions is more transparent than an aging popstar? Please. And to answer your very pointed and soul searching question yes I think Romney probably wants people to vote for him. unlike the president who I'm sure is doing all this out of the goodness of his heart. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 You're just clueless. You have no idea what I'm writing or why. I write something and you answer something else. It's really tedious. I wasn't saying that Romney is 100% craven and Obama is 100% honorable. You obviously can't read. I likened Romney's "Navy ships" line to Obama bringing up the auto bailout for Ohio, after all. The point of asking wasn't to say that Romney is particularly craven, though he is that. (I've never seen anyone more politically craven and unmoored in my entire life.) It was to see if you know how this stuff works, and you don't. And comparing Madonna to the United States government ...I don't even know how the two are even remotely like each other, or what this is supposed to say, or even what part up above you're referring to. I'm sorry that I've looked at all the info and just don't see the scandal. Lots of people don't. It doesn't mean we're all shilling for the DNC. It means we can't see how poor communication between agencies and the White House, or slightly conflicting public statements are a huge scandal. It's just a giant election year nothingburger, and you'll know it's one because if Romney were to win the whole thing will be dropped immediately and no one will ever care again. And like I said before, Democrats would probably do the same thing if the situation was reversed, though I doubt it'd be with the same vigor. The only real issue to me is whether or not embassy security is adequate going forward, and whether requests for additional security make it to the decision makers quickly enough. This is not something either party spoke a word about before the attacks, so it's a little naked when they're all crowing about it now that something's gone bad. Honestly, the way Fox is pushing things like an email saying a terrorist group posted something on Facebook, and that's supposed to be some sort of smoking gun ....this is how people get carried away when they're in the minority. I'll leave you with Kevin Drum's take, which basically mirrors my own: "As usual, I'm trying to figure out just where the scandal over Benghazi is supposed to lie. Last night, CBS News breathlessly released three emails sent to the State Department on the day of the attacks. Two of them were reports that the compound in Benghazi was under assault. Here's the third: And this proves....what? Both Obama and Hillary Clinton talked from the start about the attacks being the work of extremist elements. Susan Rice and Jay Carney later suggested that there had been protests outside the consulate and that a YouTube video had played a role in instigating the attack, but that's because this is what the CIA was telling them at the time. What's more, to this day there's still evidence that the video played a role. (An opportunistic one, probably, but a role nonetheless.) As for the charge that Obama was trying to downplay al-Qaeda involvement, that's not because he was trying to hold onto his reputation as the guy who killed bin Laden. It's because Ansar al-Sharia was a homegrown group with virtually no connection to al-Qaeda central. There really was no al-Qaeda involvement. This is crazy. Where does this stuff keep coming from? Based on the evidence we know today, the worst you can say about the White House is that they didn't do a very good job of coordinating the messages being delivered to the public by all the various agencies. Beyond that, it took about a week for everyone to get on the same page because that's how long it took before the intelligence community had a good handle on what actually happened. There's just no scandal here." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
heckofajobbrownie Posted October 25, 2012 Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Really, Steve, this would always go smoother if you stop before each post and recite these words to yourself, "Heck doesn't see things in the same monochromatic way that I do." Your arguments are almost always - and I'm talking always - a series of false dilemmas. Ex: If I'm arguing that Romney is a unique brand of panderer, even for a politician, you can skip the part where you point out that all politicians say things so voters vote for them. Or that Obama also panders to voters. We can posit the basic shit. We really can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted October 25, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 25, 2012 Really, Steve, this would always go smoother if you stop before each post and recite these words to yourself, "Heck doesn't see things in the same monochromatic way that I do." Your arguments are almost always - and I'm talking always - a series of false dilemmas. Ex: If I'm arguing that Romney is a unique brand of panderer, even for a politician, you can skip the part where you point out that all politicians say things so voters vote for them. Or that Obama also panders to voters. We can posit the basic shit. We really can. But we really can't. Just in the 1 example you present here: Romney is a unique brand of panderer. Everything, and I mean everything, the President does or says is a direct pander to 1 of his special interest group. Furthermore I suspect you know that but you have taken on the mantle of defender so you can never admit it. And you accuse me of tagging everything with well all politicians do it? It took me days to force you to admit you were unhappy with Obama's method of killing women and children to carry out his fake war against Al Qaeda. Then you couldn't help yourself. You added the obligatory Bush did it too. Another of your transparent ploys is pretending you don't understand. I think you are a true believer but I don't think you are stupid. But ( and here's something else for you to pretend not to understand) just because Stephen King is a talented writer does not mean that there really are a monster clowns living in the sewer. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.