Comments
1,281 - 1,300 of 49,863 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago
Aggie

Cartersville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1358
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

I think the families of the men who died might take issue with your statement
that "trying to turn Benghazi into something is without merit". Regrettably, Americans die in the service of this country on a far too frequent basis. The least the families deserve is the truth. The media was all over the story (and rightly so) when it was discovered that Pat Tillman was actually killed by friendly fire. Where are the mainstream media now? Given the obvious attempts to control the narrative by blaming a stupid video, when it is now confirmed that no one actually believed that, how can you deny that there is more to it. The easiest question to answer of all is who told Susan Rice to tell that falsehood. You don't find it strange that we don't know the source of that inaccurate story.
Libertarian Dillweed

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1359
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Obama blamed the attack on terrorists within the first 24 hours of it happening. On some other thread that I can't find now (weeks later) I posted links to direct quotes indicating that. Furthermore he stated such during the presidential debates.

Susan Rice was obviously given a "sanitized" story to protect national security, and it was poorly worded and based on incomplete and conflicting information. Susan Rice can't be blamed at all for delivering the approved message. Whoever it was that handed it to her can't be blamed for doing their job of insuring it didn't divulge classified information. It was probably some mid-level guy in a grungy government office whose name is classified information. I'd be willing to bet his name is known behind closed doors at the CIA. At the time of Rice's statements Obama himself had already called this a terrorist attack.

Do I find it strange that we don't know the source of the inaccurate story? No. In fact, I don't think the story was so much "inaccurate" as it was poorly worded and quickly created during a time of conflicting and overwhelming intelligence through-put.

And I think John McCain knows this as well as anybody.
Libertarian Dillweed

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1360
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

1

The above post, by the way, also explains why the mainstream media isn't making a big deal about this.

It's all pretty obvious to everyone who doesn't want the presidents head on a stick.(which includes John McCain)

It's a poor attempt to politicize unfortunate events that happened in tumultuous and unpredictable part of the world. Which, quite frankly, is pathetic and revolting.
Aggie

Cartersville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1361
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

1

Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
<quoted text>
Look around - there are hundreds of jobs on there.
I didn't say there were no jobs listed , but if you go to "Manufacturing Operations Jobs" it will tell you, "no open positions". In addition, the area that is truly critical is Research and Development, that is where many of the businesses say the jobs will be hurt the most. 2.3% may not sound like much, but it is on the sales, not the profits, which means it takes a bigger chunk. The profit margins are not as high as you might think, for every successful product developed, how much time and money was "wasted" on unsuccessful products? These companies are dependent on the profits on the successful products to offset the losses on the unsuccessful. This was one of the "downsides" to Obamacare that didn't get a lot of coverage, if you take out the chance for recouping losses, there is a lot of research that will not get done. Companies can't afford to take the risk.
another cheap talker

Alpharetta, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1362
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

3

2

2

Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
The above post, by the way, also explains why the mainstream media isn't making a big deal about this.
It's all pretty obvious to everyone who doesn't want the presidents head on a stick.(which includes John McCain)
It's a poor attempt to politicize unfortunate events that happened in tumultuous and unpredictable part of the world. Which, quite frankly, is pathetic and revolting.
u have a poor attempt to rationalize a cover up and lying 2 the American people. ur sad. Really sad.
Libertarian Dillweed

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1363
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Aggie wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't say there were no jobs listed , but if you go to "Manufacturing Operations Jobs" it will tell you, "no open positions". In addition, the area that is truly critical is Research and Development, that is where many of the businesses say the jobs will be hurt the most. 2.3% may not sound like much, but it is on the sales, not the profits, which means it takes a bigger chunk. The profit margins are not as high as you might think, for every successful product developed, how much time and money was "wasted" on unsuccessful products? These companies are dependent on the profits on the successful products to offset the losses on the unsuccessful. This was one of the "downsides" to Obamacare that didn't get a lot of coverage, if you take out the chance for recouping losses, there is a lot of research that will not get done. Companies can't afford to take the risk.
Easy enough. Let's remove the Medical Devices Tax then and replace that revenue by cutting off American Taxpayer hand-outs to big-oil, as has been suggested. The Democrats would surely go along with that compromise.
Aggie

Cartersville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1364
Nov 18, 2012
 
Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
Obama blamed the attack on terrorists within the first 24 hours of it happening. On some other thread that I can't find now (weeks later) I posted links to direct quotes indicating that. Furthermore he stated such during the presidential debates.
Susan Rice was obviously given a "sanitized" story to protect national security, and it was poorly worded and based on incomplete and conflicting information. Susan Rice can't be blamed at all for delivering the approved message. Whoever it was that handed it to her can't be blamed for doing their job of insuring it didn't divulge classified information. It was probably some mid-level guy in a grungy government office whose name is classified information. I'd be willing to bet his name is known behind closed doors at the CIA. At the time of Rice's statements Obama himself had already called this a terrorist attack.
Do I find it strange that we don't know the source of the inaccurate story? No. In fact, I don't think the story was so much "inaccurate" as it was poorly worded and quickly created during a time of conflicting and overwhelming intelligence through-put.
And I think John McCain knows this as well as anybody.
That is completely inaccurate if you are referring to his Rose Garden statement - the comment of terrorist activity was not in reference to Benghazi, it was a general statement. And he went on The View TWO WEEKS after the attack and when specifically asked if it was a terror attack he said "it is still under investigation... it wasn't just a mob action... we don't have all the information, we're still gathering" he WOULD NOT call it a terrorist action. And I am not blaming Susan Rice, I am saying we need to know who told her what to say and I don't for one minute believe that on a matter of this importance where an American Ambassador was murdered that "some mid-level guy" would be making that kind of a call. Why was SHE sent out to tell this story in the first place - the UN Ambassador - really? Leon Panetta or Hillary Clinton maybe, but it looks like Susan Rice was sent out to be the possible fall guy. It's a simple question, "Ambassador Rice, who instructed you to call it a response to a video?" And now we know that Petraeus' talking points were altered, but he didn't say by whom. Come on, surely you will admit this doesn't pass the smell test by any stretch of the imagination.
Libertarian Dillweed

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1365
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

Aggie wrote:
<quoted text>
That is completely inaccurate if you are referring to his Rose Garden statement - the comment of terrorist activity was not in reference to Benghazi, it was a general statement. And he went on The View TWO WEEKS after the attack and when specifically asked if it was a terror attack he said "it is still under investigation... it wasn't just a mob action... we don't have all the information, we're still gathering" he WOULD NOT call it a terrorist action. And I am not blaming Susan Rice, I am saying we need to know who told her what to say and I don't for one minute believe that on a matter of this importance where an American Ambassador was murdered that "some mid-level guy" would be making that kind of a call. Why was SHE sent out to tell this story in the first place - the UN Ambassador - really? Leon Panetta or Hillary Clinton maybe, but it looks like Susan Rice was sent out to be the possible fall guy. It's a simple question, "Ambassador Rice, who instructed you to call it a response to a video?" And now we know that Petraeus' talking points were altered, but he didn't say by whom. Come on, surely you will admit this doesn't pass the smell test by any stretch of the imagination.
Well what DO you think happened? That the administration somehow was the CAUSE of this attack? That the CIA killed Stephens? That Obama slipped intelligence to the trigger-men?

No. None of those things happened. Some Islamic hate-group targeted America, and had some success. It sucks. It happened. It wasn't the first time, and it won't be the last time.

It's something that happened TO America, not something perpetrated BY America.

Maybe it's a wake-up call for a review of embassy security measures, but it's no reason to put anybody's head on a pike, unless you're a Republican who just wan't to do that anyway and then Benghazi is just another excuse.
Libertarian Dillweed

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1366
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

another cheap talker wrote:
<quoted text>
u have a poor attempt to rationalize a cover up and lying 2 the American people. ur sad. Really sad.
Look Bored Monitor - I don't blame you for logging out and using another name to post this.

You're in over your head. If it can't be explained in 2 inaccurate sentences on Faux News, you don't know it.

Another thing that just is what it is.
Joe

Ellijay, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1367
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
<quoted text>
Look Bored Monitor - I don't blame you for logging out and using another name to post this.
You're in over your head. If it can't be explained in 2 inaccurate sentences on Faux News, you don't know it.
Another thing that just is what it is.
Dillweed/that suits you to a t!!!!
Aggie

Cartersville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1368
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
<quoted text>
Well what DO you think happened? That the administration somehow was the CAUSE of this attack? That the CIA killed Stephens? That Obama slipped intelligence to the trigger-men?
No. None of those things happened. Some Islamic hate-group targeted America, and had some success. It sucks. It happened. It wasn't the first time, and it won't be the last time.
It's something that happened TO America, not something perpetrated BY America.
Maybe it's a wake-up call for a review of embassy security measures, but it's no reason to put anybody's head on a pike, unless you're a Republican who just wan't to do that anyway and then Benghazi is just another excuse.
Please point to any post where I accused the Obama administration of being complicit in the attack, you won't find it. But you veered into the question so many of us are asking. I make no effort to hide the fact that I consider Obama neither worthy nor frankly competent for the office he holds. What I will give him, is that he has always appeared to be a skilled politician. And yet this whole Benghazi situation has been handled so clumsily from the get go. It was obvious to anyone watching that there was far more to it than some anger over a video. This administration is nothing if not adept at getting their story straight and out there to a sycophantic media. And yet this story was ridiculous on its face. So WHY 5 days after the attack was Susan Rice sent out to peddle this story, it makes no sense. This story, while tragic, would have been reported and over if there had not been this video nonsense that continued to be presented. Obama and Hillary appear in a commercial in Pakistan condemning the video. Susan Rice on 5 Sunday shows. Obama at the UN. And the entire time, they knew it wasn't the video. Again, it makes no sense unless there is something else going on. I have no idea what it is, but obviously, there is something they are trying to hide. Again, it wasn't a bungled burglary that brought Nixon down, it was the coverup. And if you don't think there is a coverup going on here, I don't think you are really looking with an unbiased eye. The most obvious answer is that by blaming the video and a subsequent protest/riot, any blame to the administration over not adequately protecting the consulate could be blunted, in theory. But if all the time Obama is touting that Al Qaeda is in shambles, our ambassador is reporting otherwise and requesting security that is denied because the administration is more concerned with their image than the safety of our personnel, that is another story entirely. To put it mildly, it would be a disgraceful and immoral show of narcissism. And I don't claim that that is the truth, it just is the least inflammatory explanation. But that is my point, the American people have still not been given the whole story. Was help asked for and denied that night? If so, why? Why was the requested additional security denied? Were the men at the CIA annex told to stand down when they requested permission to go to the consulate and render aid? If so, why? These are legitimate questions, not partisan attempts to discredit Obama.
Dept of Insanity Cop

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1369
Nov 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Aggie wrote:
<quoted text>
there is something else going on. I have no idea what it is
It's very reasonable to assume that there are very classified elements to all of this.

Political and partisan? Romney tried to make it political while it was still going on. McCain is STILL trying to make it political in an effort to create a new job for himself. At least Joe Leiberman see's what he's up to. Run of the mill Faux News readers don't understand what the hell is going on - they just were told to blame Obama - so they are.
Dept of Insanity Cop

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1370
Nov 18, 2012
 
I should mention that even Sexy Chablis (Saxby Chandliss) can't get onboard with this..and he's ready to jump on everything. The Senate Intelligence Committee I would bet has a pretty good idea of what's going on. We aren't entitled to know EVERYTHING.. at least not things that would expose classified information.
Aggie

Cartersville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1371
Nov 18, 2012
 
Fine, then just come out and say the investigation is ongoing. But there was WAY too hard a push on the video story, THAT is what made people question it. But some people are too partisan to take the blinders off.
Dept of Insanity Cop

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1372
Nov 18, 2012
 
Aggie wrote:
Fine, then just come out and say the investigation is ongoing. But there was WAY too hard a push on the video story, THAT is what made people question it. But some people are too partisan to take the blinders off.
Not partisan, just understanding of it.

Don't forget, about 20 or so cities WERE raising hell over that video. Burning flags, riots, chanting etc all over the middle-east. They do get worked up over their religion over there.

There was a coordinated terrorist attack on our embassy. There ALSO were riots over some stupid anti-Islam film. Both things happened.
Mustard Biscuit

Dalton, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1373
Nov 18, 2012
 
Aggie wrote:
Fine, then just come out and say the investigation is ongoing. But there was WAY too hard a push on the video story, THAT is what made people question it. But some people are too partisan to take the blinders off.
I agree with you. It's time to take off the blinders!
Dept of Insanity Cop

Douglasville, GA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1374
Nov 18, 2012
 

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1377
Nov 18, 2012
 
Dept of Insanity Cop wrote:
<quoted text>
Not partisan, just understanding of it.
Don't forget, about 20 or so cities WERE raising hell over that video. Burning flags, riots, chanting etc all over the middle-east. They do get worked up over their religion over there.
There was a coordinated terrorist attack on our embassy. There ALSO were riots over some stupid anti-Islam film. Both things happened.
The obama admin was pinning the blame on the video from the start despite the fact that Petraeus reported that it was a terrorist attack. There is also evidence that something could have been done to help but none was sent.
]http://factcheck.org/2012/10/ benghazi-timeline/

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1378
Nov 18, 2012
 

Since: Jul 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1379
Nov 18, 2012
 
Libertarian Dillweed wrote:
The Budget and Accounting Act of 1921 indicates that a budget must be submitted each year by the President. That budget is fleshed out by the Office of Management and Budget. He's Done this. In fact, you can see his 2013 budget online right now. Enjoy your reading...
The Congressional Budget Act of 1974 requires Congress to pass and work out a budget. They can just let the presidents fly right though..(yeah..right!).. or they can work out their own.
Republican obstructionism in the 212th Congress has basically made this an impossibility. You want a budget? Get rid of your Tea Party congressmen.
Getting a budget passed is a messy affair. People try to tack things on, they use procedural elements to black basic movement, different majority numbers are required for certain things. Given the nature of the 212th Congress, it's no surprise that there's been no progress. If this didn't make sense, you should read more on the Congressional Budget Process.
To repeatedly say "Obama didn't pass a budget" is just cheap political talk intended to rile-up the uninformed.
Harry and the dimwits.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/apr/...

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

10 Users are viewing the Brunswick Forum right now

Search the Brunswick Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
beverly hill billy speed trap court of Darien Ga. (Jun '09) 3 hr Easy target 136
What happened to Kim Devore Jul 22 Rumor 3
Review: The Georgia Crab Co Jul 21 faisha 1
Handicap Parking Patrol in Glynn County (Aug '07) Jul 21 Nonliberal 20
GA Who do you support for Governor in Georgia in 2... (Oct '10) Jul 16 what 2,045
Blueberry growers go to 'pick-it-yourself' model Jul 11 LocavoreT 3
Dukes of Iron MC Jul 9 Itty Bitty Dick Committee 3
•••
•••
•••
•••

Brunswick Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Brunswick People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Brunswick News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Brunswick
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••