ChicknButt

Decatur, GA

#8645 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Exactly, THANK YOU - a terrorist act was visited UPON Americans by Islamic radicals, not because of a video virtually no one even saw.
So a bunch of terrorists killed people at our embassy. Everybody is in agreement on that. It wasn't Obama that did it. So why the fixation?

Is it because the initial news that was released while details and analysis were still happening wasn't perfectly accurate?

Since when did Republicans require accuracy from their news?
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8646 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact that you had to go to Wiki to try and find out how many Americans were killed in Benghazi would imply you have been in a comatose state since September - not really surprised though, there were a lot of virtual zombies pulling that Democrat lever in November.
What is there to address about 9/11 - radical Islamists (you know, the term that the AP has banned from its columns - more PC run amok) murdered almost 3,000 innocent people - mostly Americans.
And what was President Bush's response on that day:
"Today, our fellow citizens, our way of life, our very freedom came under attack in a series of deliberate and deadly terrorist acts.….These acts of mass murder were intended to frighten our nation into chaos and retreat. But they have failed. Our country is strong.
A great people has been moved to defend a great nation. Terrorist attacks can shake the foundations of our biggest buildings, but they cannot touch the foundation of America. These acts shatter steel, but they cannot dent the steel of American resolve. America was targeted for attack because we're the brightest beacon for freedom and opportunity in the world. And no one will keep that light from shining. Today, our nation saw evil -- the very worst of human nature -- and we responded with the best of America.…."
--------
"No wonder the official film of Right Wing Wacko World is "Wizard of Oz"-
- Pay no attention to the issue !
- Look look over here !"
Now this really is hilarious. Pot, meet kettle. Here is Obama's response on Sept 12, 2013:
"But in an interview with CBS newsman Steve Kroft after the Rose Garden statement but on the same day, Obama was asked what he meant because Kroft indicated it was unclear:
Kroft: Mr. President, this morning you went out of your way to avoid the use of the word terrorism in connection with the Libya attack. Do you believe that this was a terrorist attack?
Obama: Well it's too early to know exactly how this came about, what group was involved, but obviously it was an attack on Americans."
---------
And in a real effort at "Look, look over here!"
September 12: Secretary Clinton and President Obama issue statements condemning both the video and the attacks.
September 13: Press Secretary Jay Carney condemns video and violence at a news conference.
September 14: The bodies of slain Americans return to Andrews Air Force Base. President Obama again blames the YouTube video.
September 16: U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice appears on Sunday talk shows and says the attacks were provoked by the video, exclusively.
September 17: State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland refuses to call attacks an act of terror.
September 20: Obama refuses to call attack terrorism, citing insufficient information.
September 25: On ABC’s “The View,” Obama says,“we don’t have all of the information yet so we are still gathering.”
September 25: To the U.N. assembly, Obama blames “A crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world.
September 26: Published reports show U.S. Intel agencies and the Obama Administration knew within 24 hours that al-Qaeda affiliated terrorist were involved.
-----
And how many have been arrested and held by the US since the Benghazi murders?
September 27: Innocence of Muslims filmmaker Mark Basseley Youseff (aka Nakoula Basseley Nakoula) is arrested and denied bail on the charges of “probation violation.”
Dam good post of telling it like it is. Dont let them libtards bait you and then do a switch-a-roo on you.
You wont convince them but you sure do a good job of showing themn up and cutting them off at the knees.

Hey all you stumpys!
You are not excused

Dawsonville, GA

#8648 May 3, 2013
excuse me wrote:
<quoted text>
Excuse me, thousands were murdered in the Bush wars. Started with a lie, "weapons of mass destruction" and yet no endless search for justice from what you lovingly call libs. You and your buds are beating a dead horse, but you got nothing else to talk about.

The same lie put to Clinton who believed it, the same lie put to democraps on the intelligence committee, the same lie put Congress, and the same lie put to the rest of the free world.
What dont you understand about lies?

Anyone can play hindsight, being born ignorant is no excuse.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8649 May 3, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>If you hold it in you will implode
LOL, now don't you tempt me too, I'm trying to be good.
You are not excused

Dawsonville, GA

#8650 May 3, 2013
OMTE wrote:
<quoted text>Please admit that Bush was the worst president ever in history. Give yourself a leg to stand on. I'm trying to help you.

Sure you are, you have no legs of your own.
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8651 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
"Get thee behind me, Satan." And no, that is neither a reference nor an allusion, it is a plea that I not issue profanity to my computer in response to your refusal to admit you were completely wrong. But what else is new? Respond away, I'm done with kicking a dead horse. Note the use of an idiom.

You kicked his a**, no two ways about it. You should have made of his legs even after cutting them off. With one longer than the other he now will bounce up and down as he stumbles along.


Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8652 May 3, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
So a bunch of terrorists killed people at our embassy. Everybody is in agreement on that. It wasn't Obama that did it. So why the fixation?
Is it because the initial news that was released while details and analysis were still happening wasn't perfectly accurate?
Since when did Republicans require accuracy from their news?

Even little ole me can answer that quesiton. It was the blatant false info put out by Obama and his hench woman about the sorry video. And even after knowing it was a lie, Obama the traitor stood by his story.
Now he says he doesnt know.
how can that be

Dahlonega, GA

#8653 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope, I'm afraid the current occupant has saved Jimmy Carter from that position.
How can that be??? When Bush has shown that his incompetence and lies killed thousands of good young Americans, using Bush fiction as the reason. Add to that he also was the main player in the killing of the economy and that result drove down home values putting the American dream on hold for millions and drove interest rates to zero. At least Carters failed attempt in Iran was to SAVE Americans and if you had money during the Carter years you got a nice return with interest rates at historic highs. And it didn't kill the housing industry because people still had money to buy homes. Bush or Carter, that’s not even a fair fight its Carter by MILES.

I don't expect a reply, nothing you can say to defend the indefensible.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8654 May 3, 2013
how can that be wrote:
<quoted text>
if you had money during the Carter years you got a nice return with interest rates at historic highs. And it didn't kill the housing industry because people still had money to buy homes. Bush or Carter, that’s not even a fair fight its Carter by MILES.
I don't expect a reply, nothing you can say to defend the indefensible.
Except that return you received wasn't worth as much because when you have inflation, the "real value" of your money drops. And I wouldn't argue with your conclusion at all. The topic was "who is the worst president ever" - you stated "Bush or Carter,...its Carter by MILES." - I agree completely.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8655 May 3, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>

Is it because the initial news that was released while details and analysis were still happening wasn't perfectly accurate?
Nope, it's because the administration KNEW their story wasn't true, but continued to repeat it over and over and over for weeks.
ChicknButt

Decatur, GA

#8656 May 3, 2013
Bored wrote:
<quoted text>
Even little ole me can answer that quesiton. It was the blatant false info put out by Obama and his hench woman about the sorry video. And even after knowing it was a lie, Obama the traitor stood by his story.
Now he says he doesnt know.
On September 12th I watched Obama's briefing and he called it an attack. It's there in the transcripts.

Romney himself claimed he would politicize it, and did. McCain fed fuel onto that in an effort to create a new committee position.

This is just a Republican witch-hunt.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#8657 May 3, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>
You have resorted to a strawman argument.
Nope, the post never said ALL business owners are amoral, the post said that business, by its very nature, is amoral. Unfortunatley, history has shown that a percentage of people will follow the path of least reisitence without regard for their neighbor next door, down stream, or down wind.
To temper the inherent amorality of business people act collectively, through government, to impose limits on business. Many times these limits, or regulations, internalize the cost of doing business thus effecting the potential profits of a business.
Whether it's the cost of exit doors that are unlocked and open outward, or the cost of locating a fertizler plant away from a populated area, business would much prefer not to incur these costs as they are a direct drain on profits.
No straw man on my side, this was your post:
----------
"No that means that the purpose of the business is to make money:
- through any means possible,
- externalizing all costs onto the taxpayers, neighbors, and/or customers,
- with no concern for pollution, injury, and damages they create,
- paying the absolute minimum in wages.

That is the purpose of a business.
That means you have to regulate businesses as the amoral entities they are.

Nothing wrong with businesses - they are just amoral entities designed to maximize profit and avoid personal responsibilities for the owners. "
----------
"through any means possible"
"with no concern"
"paying the absolute minimum in wages"
"businesses the amoral entities they are"
"they are just amoral entities"

Except that a business is not sentient and makes none of those decisions - the people who run the businesses make those decisions. Consequently, you should have qualified your statement that SOME business owners may act in the above mentioned ways. But you said "you have to regulate businesses as the amoral entities they are" which translates to "you have to regulate business owners as the amoral entities they are" - if you didn't mean it, you shouldn't have said it. Just saying.
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8658 May 3, 2013
how can that be wrote:
<quoted text>
How can that be??? When Bush has shown that his incompetence and lies killed thousands of good young Americans, using Bush fiction as the reason. Add to that he also was the main player in the killing of the economy and that result drove down home values putting the American dream on hold for millions and drove interest rates to zero. At least Carters failed attempt in Iran was to SAVE Americans and if you had money during the Carter years you got a nice return with interest rates at historic highs. And it didn't kill the housing industry because people still had money to buy homes. Bush or Carter, that’s not even a fair fight its Carter by MILES.
I don't expect a reply, nothing you can say to defend the indefensible.

What a dunce. The democraps forced on Bush the housing mortgage debacle. The intel on Iraq went all the way back to Clinton and most all the democraps in Congress believed it at the time also. You libtards only have a one way tunnel sight, hang everything on Bush. And your hindsight is no better than your foresight. You only have one sight you are focused on, Obamas Butt.

From the huffington post, and all conservative patriots know the libtards live and die by the huffington post.

4-11-2013, Forty-seven percent of Americans approved of Obama's job performance.

4-23-2013, Forty-seven percent of Americans now approve of Bush's presidency. I expect by the time his term expires, his numbers will only include 90% of the black people, and all the white libtards which aint that many, like maybe 10-15% that just make a hellva lot of worthless noise.

There was evidence of disgorging on their website while posting Bush's numbers.
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8659 May 3, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
On September 12th I watched Obama's briefing and he called it an attack. It's there in the transcripts.
Romney himself claimed he would politicize it, and did. McCain fed fuel onto that in an effort to create a new committee position.
This is just a Republican witch-hunt.

Well now Obama called it an attack, What else could he call it? A square dance? a chit-chat? You are surely struggling with this post cause it is evident you dont even believe you wrote the words here.

Keep telling yourself Obama was innocent, Obama was innocent, when all the time everyone knows the dunce mouthpiece from the U.N. was following orders from Obama to blame it on the video. She thought she would get another job and her sucking up and lying for Obama cost her that job, as the Repubs made clear she would not be confirmed for dog catcher.
Bored

Dawsonville, GA

#8660 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
No straw man on my side, this was your post:
----------
if you didn't mean it, you shouldn't have said it. Just saying.

Oh, he meant it alright. One could track down many posts where he and IO have shown they are truly socialists oriented, and believe the purpose of business is to serve the State and the people who live and depend on the State for substance. Business has no businees making decisions, government should make all the decisions, take mopst of their profit and give to the socialists dependents.




OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#8661 May 3, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
So a bunch of terrorists killed people at our embassy. Everybody is in agreement on that. It wasn't Obama that did it. So why the fixation?
Is it because the initial news that was released while details and analysis were still happening wasn't perfectly accurate?
Since when did Republicans require accuracy from their news?
They don't want to give credit to Obama for killing Bin Laden, but suggest that he is directly responsable for the death of theses Americans. They want to have their cake and eat it too; like a fat kid.

Since: Jul 12

Villa Rica, GA

#8662 May 3, 2013
Here is another example of Obama spinning B.S.
Seems that he has forgotten all about his administrations dealings with the American Governments running guns. That was called Fast and Furious by the Justice Department. Hundreds of weapons were furnished to Mexican drug gangs to kill hundreds of Mexicans and one of our Border Agents. His speeches are hollow and deceiving, and he can say anything without the people laughing him off the stage. This speech is laughable and totally a bunch of bull. All he wants to do is take peoples rights to bear arms away from them.
He condemns the guns which he claims to support. Then blames his own country for Mexico's drug gang problems. What a wonderful president that gives his support to his own country by blaming it.
He then ignores the past when his administration passed hundreds of guns to the Mexican Drug gangs to kill hundreds of Mexican people. I guess we will just forget that one .
How anyone can take this guy serious, trust anything that he says, and can't see what he is beyond me. Watch his hilarious speech below.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2013/0...
OMTE

Fitzgerald, GA

#8663 May 3, 2013
Aggie23 wrote:
<quoted text>
No straw man on my side, this was your post:
----------
"No that means that the purpose of the business is to make money:
- through any means possible,
- externalizing all costs onto the taxpayers, neighbors, and/or customers,
- with no concern for pollution, injury, and damages they create,
- paying the absolute minimum in wages.
That is the purpose of a business.
That means you have to regulate businesses as the amoral entities they are.
Nothing wrong with businesses - they are just amoral entities designed to maximize profit and avoid personal responsibilities for the owners. "
----------
"through any means possible"
"with no concern"
"paying the absolute minimum in wages"
"businesses the amoral entities they are"
"they are just amoral entities"
Except that a business is not sentient and makes none of those decisions - the people who run the businesses make those decisions. Consequently, you should have qualified your statement that SOME business owners may act in the above mentioned ways. But you said "you have to regulate businesses as the amoral entities they are" which translates to "you have to regulate business owners as the amoral entities they are" - if you didn't mean it, you shouldn't have said it. Just saying.
Moral starts with the business owners. There was a code that was enforced in the past that protected the employee and in return the employees took care of the business. This FREE trade sh*t and deregulation has screwed this country. Couple that with a wave of mexicans and our wages have went back 20 years. Greed will make anyone stray from what's right. There has to be rules to business even in a recession. If not, a few get rich and the rest of us starve. Rich people kill their kids and sponses for insurance money. Do you think they would hesitate to poison a small community in Georgia? I don't. If the business owners would stop hiring illegal aliens then there would be more jobs for Americans. The business owners are the backbone of this country, but are not to be trusted. Not because they are bad people, but because they are human.
Informed Opinion

Hollywood, FL

#8664 May 3, 2013
Oh my wrote:
<quoted text>You have resorted to a strawman argument.

Nope, the post never said ALL business owners are amoral, the post said that business, by its very nature, is amoral. Unfortunatley, history has shown that a percentage of people will follow the path of least reisitence without regard for their neighbor next door, down stream, or down wind.

To temper the inherent amorality of business people act collectively, through government, to impose limits on business. Many times these limits, or regulations, internalize the cost of doing business thus effecting the potential profits of a business.

Whether it's the cost of exit doors that are unlocked and open outward, or the cost of locating a fertizler plant away from a populated area, business would much prefer not to incur these costs as they are a direct drain on profits.
Great post.

Rational, articulate and well-reasoned.

Since: Nov 08

Location hidden

#8665 May 3, 2013
ChicknButt wrote:
<quoted text>
So a bunch of terrorists killed people at our embassy. Everybody is in agreement on that. It wasn't Obama that did it. So why the fixation?
Is it because the initial news that was released while details and analysis were still happening wasn't perfectly accurate?
Since when did Republicans require accuracy from their news?
Get over Benghazi? And then THIS POST???? I am shocked at you. You truly are sick. You can make such arrogant statements and call yourself an American. Astounding. The maddening thing is if a conservative had been in office and Benghazi occurred, you liberal socialist commies would be shooting people down in the streets. Your statements about Behghazi just to protect that scum of a president we have is lower than I ever thought you would go.
As for your last sentence, everyone knows how accurate and popular MSNBC is. Hanging on by its fingernails.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form 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.

Hinesville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Men Wearing Thongs (Sep '08) Apr 22 topnotch 246
Divorce in Bryan county Apr 15 skipperhub 2
Why do some Ft. Stewart Sargeants act like t... (Aug '09) Apr 9 t8kin 75
Toke Apr 6 checo 1
Can a police officer get fired for sleeping wit... (Jul '11) Apr 6 Reality Check 25
News Businesses relieved Brown Ave. bridge will reop... Apr 6 Will Dockery 1
Moving to Richmond Hill Apr 2 Curious 3
More from around the web

Hinesville People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]