Bush is a hero

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161913 May 11, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
We don't really need tips from the party of no.
But thanks anyway.
Indeed. I means you got the irs to go after the bad guys now. You do all you can to make sure people feel the pain as with the airports a few weeks ago. Anyone that questions its its the usual you hate Obama yada yada yada as Willie just posted. He says this thread is a "circle jerk". Uh, not so much. Self absorbed people running the nation to the ground and prasing each other at gov/ Hollywood parties is a circle jerk.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161914 May 11, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>You mean proof that Obama said "Screw the diplomats, I plan to get re-elected...and I don't care what it costs in American lives..."?
Well we do now have proof that in the last few weeks a few in this admin lied under oath. But what the hell, Willie says its no big deal, nobody has any interest. Good thing some don't share that pov.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/...

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

Seattle, WA

#161915 May 11, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
You should go through your cajones and throw all your dirty magazines away..........And then grow some cojones and apologize to all the people you've played 'official topix spell checker' with..........
No detention for you today.

You even get a gold star for successful googling.

Bien hecho.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#161916 May 11, 2013
bad bob wrote:
<quoted text>
RUBBISH W. Put yer big-boy pants back on and quit bleating.
You may be miffed because the heat's been turned up on the State Dept (Clinton), and by extension, Obama, But many of us are sick to death of this freakin' ROOKIE skating away from accountability, because of his color, popularity, and help from the MSM.
You voted for Obama instead of McCain, and instead of Romney, OK I get that. But I call other voters ENABLERS, because many were clueless, many low info, many scared hispanics, and scared women, too afraid to try Romney. And yes, Romney also didn't help himself when he should have, so much of the blame goes to him too.
There was a joint agreement to cover up the TERRORIST ATTACK, by
members of the State Dep't and probably Ben Rhodes, so that Obama's reelection campaign would not be sullied. Your claim that it's more about Obama's takedown, than it is about the 4 murdered
men is pure hogwash. How about the embarrassment of an inexperienced C-I-C to "sacrifice" those men for the purpose of his almighty campaign. How about the FAMILIES of the slain men wanting the GD TRUTH!
It's no surprise that you wanna see Obama, Clinton, and the rest of ObamaCo, emerge from these hearings smelling rosy. Often I felt the same way about BushCo. But when is enough gonna be enough? From Obamacare, to F & F to Benghazi, this admin can do NO wrong.
Sit on yer hands if you don't like the way this thread has been trending. I damn sure won't, whether it looks like a witch hunt or not.
Are you really this stupid, bob?

I don't care that heat's been put on the State Department. In the aftermath of something like Benghazi, heat SHOULD be on the State Department and the White House.

What I do care about is the fact that any actual accountability for what happened in Benghazi and its aftermath will NEVER COME TO FRUITION so long as any hearing or investigation is motivated more by the desire to get Obama or Clinton than they are in figuring out what went wrong.

If anything's going to let "Slick Hilly" escape what responsibility may actually properly land on her desk (beyond the general 'buck stops here'), it's going to be the obvious witch hunt that's been underway since before the bodies got back to the United States.

Show me something, bob, other than bodies and yelling and screaming. Show me, for example, that the reason the rescue assets weren't deployed was based on political rather than tactical reasons.

The only way you're going to show me that is through some kind of unbiased, impartial investigation - something that's as likely to come out of the House of Representatives now as an unbiased, impartial investigation of the Iraq War would have come out of the House circa 2007 under Pelosi.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#161917 May 11, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
Well we do now have proof that in the last few weeks a few in this admin lied under oath. But what the hell, Willie says its no big deal, nobody has any interest. Good thing some don't share that pov.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/...
I realize that reading posts is not your strong suit, but would you be so kind as to point out where I've said anything close to what you suggest?

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#161918 May 11, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
You're addressing something I've wondered about. We sent nothing, except a couple of drones with cameras, to aid our people. AS it was, the attack lasted seven hours and came in two separate attacks. Who knew if there would be a third or forth attack, or if al-qaeda would have made a day of it... in which case we had more than enough time to send help. The truth is, our commander-in-chief had no clue how many attack waves were planned, or how long al-qaeda was going to keep attacking.
Without a declaration of war, obama had sole responsibility for committing American troops to fight on foreign soil. He chose to do nothing, and leave those Americans defenseless and on their own, against numerically superior forces and weapons.
When do we start getting the names of the people that made the decisions that caused this huge blunder, and the deaths of those four Americans? When do we see people getting fired... and we can start with Jay Carney.(I never though I'd say it, but Jay makes Robert Fibbs seem almost competent.
Are you really this stupid?

Rhetorical question - I know you are. You are one of the people I believe to be more interested in beating Obama with dead Americans than you are the casualties themselves.

I'm wondering how you KNOW the U.S. had assets in range sufficient to effect a rescue. I'm wondering how you KNOW that the decision not to deploy was political rather than tactical.

Your obsessive hatred of Obama isn't actually evidence, bobin. I'm not stupid - I'm perfectly aware that the decision COULD HAVE BEEN political.

What I'm wondering is if you've got something to prove that it happened.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#161919 May 11, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>You mean proof that Obama said "Screw the diplomats, I plan to get re-elected...and I don't care what it costs in American lives..."?
Uhhh ... no, that's not what I had in mind.

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#161920 May 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Uhhh ... no, that's not what I had in mind.
Right. What you want is an unbiased investigation....which hasn't yet been performed on any major, or minor, terrorist attack in this country, for 4 decades. Hell, we couldn't even get an unbiased investigation into the assassination of JFK.

What makes ANY of you think it's going to be any different this time?

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161921 May 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I realize that reading posts is not your strong suit, but would you be so kind as to point out where I've said anything close to what you suggest?
There's nothing elitist about chickens**t, and making a big deal of a mispronounced word (Corps once or a couple of times, nuclear as part of a more general speech pattern) ain't nothing if it ain't chickens**t.

Can you say nuclear?

Willie doesn't have a lot to say about this thread. Been sick for a week and haven't check it out at all.

Didn't miss a damned thing.

There's no interest in any form of discussion left among most of the regulars here. There's no interest in discussing, say, what went wrong in Benghazi, or why available assets weren't set in, except in the context of how Obama screwed it up.

If you stray outside the context you are dismissed as blindly defending Obama, whether that's true or not. The concern does NOT seem to be with the four dead Americans; the concern seems to be with beating Obama with their bodies.

This has become a circle jerk.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#161922 May 11, 2013
Rider on the Storm wrote:
<quoted text>
Can Obama be defended in this Willie?
That's just it. Willie can pretend that what went wrong in Benghazi has nothing to do with clinton or Obama but he is only fooling himself. You cannot separate what went wrong from the leadership. They screwed up whether purposely or because of total incompetence remains to be seen, but the buck stops somewhere.
Willie is so tangled in his "I have the corner on what is logical" that he is totally blinded to true logic.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161923 May 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>I realize that reading posts is not your strong suit, but would you be so kind as to point out where I've said anything close to what you suggest?
Btw I'm guessing all the regs here really do care about the 4 dead Americans, despite your post saying otherwise.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#161924 May 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Are you really this stupid, bob?
I don't care that heat's been put on the State Department. In the aftermath of something like Benghazi, heat SHOULD be on the State Department and the White House.
What I do care about is the fact that any actual accountability for what happened in Benghazi and its aftermath will NEVER COME TO FRUITION so long as any hearing or investigation is motivated more by the desire to get Obama or Clinton than they are in figuring out what went wrong.
If anything's going to let "Slick Hilly" escape what responsibility may actually properly land on her desk (beyond the general 'buck stops here'), it's going to be the obvious witch hunt that's been underway since before the bodies got back to the United States.
Show me something, bob, other than bodies and yelling and screaming. Show me, for example, that the reason the rescue assets weren't deployed was based on political rather than tactical reasons.
The only way you're going to show me that is through some kind of unbiased, impartial investigation - something that's as likely to come out of the House of Representatives now as an unbiased, impartial investigation of the Iraq War would have come out of the House circa 2007 under Pelosi.
Here's the deal, Willie. The mother of one of the seals said happy mother's day to Hillary. She said at least she had a child left. That mother doesn't. Hillary has totally left the building on this with no thought of what she "should have" done.

“Help Cecil Help!”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#161925 May 11, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>Right. What you want is an unbiased investigation....which hasn't yet been performed on any major, or minor, terrorist attack in this country, for 4 decades. Hell, we couldn't even get an unbiased investigation into the assassination of JFK.
What makes ANY of you think it's going to be any different this time?
Uhhhhh ... the Kennedy Assassination?

Huh.

I'm skeptical of Congressional investigations because of the inherent political nature of Congress. The problem of wildly biased 'investigations' goes way back way before the JFK assassination, btw; I've read some from reconstruction through the 20s, not to mention some of the McCarthy Committee stuff from the 50s, that would make John Boehner and Nancy Pelosi look downright apolitical.

(yes, I mean read them. I'm a history geek - sue me.)

Being skeptical, however, is not the same thing as dismissing them outright in order to pursue wild conspiracy theories about the sinister forces behind everything from the 60s assassinations up through 9/11, because, you know, THEY are hiding the truth from us.

Truly unbiased is a goal I don't know can ever be achieved, but in normal times Congress does a much better job than you might expect out of professional pols with significant events.

The thing is, these aren't normal times. These are highly polarized times that make the 60s look downright amicable. It started probably toward the end of the term of Bush I and has been increasing exponentially since. IMO you've got to go back to 1939-41, or before that 1859-60, to find a comparison.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161926 May 11, 2013
WildWeirdWillie wrote:
<quoted text>Are you really this stupid?
Rhetorical question - I know you are. You are one of the people I believe to be more interested in beating Obama with dead Americans than you are the casualties themselves.
I'm wondering how you KNOW the U.S. had assets in range sufficient to effect a rescue. I'm wondering how you KNOW that the decision not to deploy was political rather than tactical.
Your obsessive hatred of Obama isn't actually evidence, bobin. I'm not stupid - I'm perfectly aware that the decision COULD HAVE BEEN political.
What I'm wondering is if you've got something to prove that it happened.
Or it could be that Bob is kind of tired of the never ending lies. Over the last year all I heard was "Romeny lies, Romeny lies. Strange that when the Pres, the one we have now is caught its the same crap I've been hearing since 2008. You hate him, don't like him because he is black, don't like him because he is a Muslim (yet to hear anyone I know say it but the left says it often) Do you have anything other than the same crap thats now close to 6 years running?

Catcher1

Since: Sep 10

United States

#161927 May 11, 2013
Chris Clearwater wrote:
<quoted text>
There's nothing elitist about chickens**t, and making a big deal of a mispronounced word (Corps once or a couple of times, nuclear as part of a more general speech pattern) ain't nothing if it ain't chickens**t.
Can you say nuclear?
Willie doesn't have a lot to say about this thread. Been sick for a week and haven't check it out at all.
Didn't miss a damned thing.
There's no interest in any form of discussion left among most of the regulars here. There's no interest in discussing, say, what went wrong in Benghazi, or why available assets weren't set in, except in the context of how Obama screwed it up.
If you stray outside the context you are dismissed as blindly defending Obama, whether that's true or not. The concern does NOT seem to be with the four dead Americans; the concern seems to be with beating Obama with their bodies.
This has become a circle jerk.
Yep.

But Catcher will help you with the fundamentals of grammar and spelling.

I leave the comedy to you guys and gals.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161928 May 11, 2013
DS Higgins wrote:
<quoted text>
The previous statement still stands Hip. YOU, or any other left-winger can commission a study, that might debunk the "right-wing-myopic-study ".... right?
But I guess, absent evidence, you are more comfortable, for the moment, to make self-righteous claims about "jingoistic fear" on the other side.
I miss you D.S. Was looking back in time this is from Dec 2008. And so it goes...

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161929 May 11, 2013
Catcher1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep.
But Catcher will help you with the fundamentals of grammar and spelling.
I leave the comedy to you guys and gals.
You missed Stewart and Maddow? The whole thing is a comedy. Wonder if the families that lost loved ones are laughing?

“Take It To The Limit”

Since: Mar 11

Location hidden

#161930 May 11, 2013
Relax, guys. I think willie was playing with guns and accidently shot his sense of humor off. He used to know when I was kidding. Besides, the post was more to Lyndi than willie.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161931 May 11, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Here's the deal, Willie. The mother of one of the seals said happy mother's day to Hillary. She said at least she had a child left. That mother doesn't. Hillary has totally left the building on this with no thought of what she "should have" done.
I will say one thing here for Michelle Obama. She seems to care about the military and the familes that gave so much. Don't know if thats real or p/r but I would like to think so. It too bad Michelle Obama isn't the potus. Don't really get that vibe from Pres Obama or Hillary. Disdain is all they have.

“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater, FL

#161932 May 11, 2013
Rudyard Kiplingesque wrote:
Relax, guys. I think willie was playing with guns and accidently shot his sense of humor off. He used to know when I was kidding. Besides, the post was more to Lyndi than willie.
Lol.

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.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Plurality of Americans think Trump is failing (Mar '17) 3 min swampmudd 42,492
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 12 min Robert F 989,863
News Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 14 min TRUE CATHOLIC her... 690,594
Bring the jobs back to the USA! 38 min Big Al 646
Why it's high time to get rid of billionaires 2 hr Paul McCartney is... 57
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 6 hr Nov 2017 619,852
Spread This Around & Stop The Lies! 8 hr Truth 1
More from around the web