“Rainbow: God's covenant ”

Since: May 07

Clearwater and Honolulu

#168675 Sep 19, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
<quoted text>
Democrats don't seem very interested in finding out what caused the deaths of four Americans in Benghazi, or about the lies that were being told to the American people afterward. Democrats seem to be more interested in covering-up, than in the investigation.
Thought you would like to see this.

The members of the committee who walked out today:

Rep. Carolyn B. Maloney, New York
Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of Columbia
Rep. John F. Tierney, Massachusetts
Rep. Wm. Lacy Clay, Missouri
Rep. Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Rep. Jim Cooper, Tennessee
Rep. Gerald E. Connolly, Virginia
Rep. Matt Cartwright, Pennsylvannia
Rep. Mark Pocan, Wisconsin
Rep. Tammy Duckworth, Illinois
Rep. Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Rep. Robin Kelly, Illinois
Rep. Peter Welch, Vermont
Rep. Tony Cardenas, California
Rep. Steven Horsford, Nevada
Rep. Michelle Lujan Grisham, New Mexico

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168676 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>Bless your honesty.
Because THIS is what it's about, and always has been. It ain't got nothing to do with security. When asked about security and process fixes, various Republicans have said, "We'll deal with that after...". After, they said.
And it's got nothing to do with brave Americans, three of which not one in 10,000 can even name, even after 13 months of ravenous attention. Nothing at all to do with their lives, and tragic deaths. Never did.
It's all to do with, "How can we keep these bodies from mouldering just long enough to turn their deaths to political advantage?"
You are just so wrong. We can tolerate the cheating and the lying and the blow jobs and the broken promises until someone dies for those things. Benghazi is the only thing I care about. The rest is just politics as usual.
If anyone could have used it to political advantage it would have been Romney but he refused to do so. You may be able to imagine people using dead sons, husbands and brothers as pawns but it is totally off my radar screen and I think it is off those who are trying to get to the bottom of this.
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168677 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Seems to me that for someone who thinks Benghazi is a "phony" scandal you are working very hard to prove someone's innocence, I'm not sure who. Since in a court of law or any investigation it is up to those who think there is guilt to prove that. Well if they do prove it, they just....do.
I am quite aware of the dual tactics of dismissing an opposing view with the old faithful blanket statement, "Oh you're just in the tank for >fill-in-the-blank< ", while trying to maneuver the opposition into self-defense rather than have to actually argue a position with facts. It's a tired tactic of those with little else in the fact-based arsenal. But I'll admit all too often they do work, so I can see where one might resort to them almost exclusively. I realize it's unsporting of me, but I'm sorry, Hippy don't play dat.

My particular interest is and always has been to rebut willful ignorance and gratuitous smear, from my first day here. I've done the same any way it flies, as I did against the 9/11 truthers, the Impeach Bush screamers, and the My Pet Goat squealers. I've said it a hundred times - in a representative democracy, we get the government we deserve. We can't say a word about lies in government when we engage and tolerate it amongst ourselves. But we do anyway,'cos we got our rahts. Right? So, Big Surprise! Our government is just like us!

It ain't up to me all the chimp-scat has only been flying one way the last five years. I'm just doin' my thing any ol' way. A'ight?

“Mean People Suck”

Since: Dec 06

Lafayette IN

#168678 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You are just so wrong. We can tolerate the cheating and the lying and the blow jobs and the broken promises until someone dies for those things. Benghazi is the only thing I care about. The rest is just politics as usual.
If anyone could have used it to political advantage it would have been Romney but he refused to do so. You may be able to imagine people using dead sons, husbands and brothers as pawns but it is totally off my radar screen and I think it is off those who are trying to get to the bottom of this.
It's because using the pain and suffering of survivors is off the radar screen of most people that it works so well.

It's something that would be on the radar screen of some, perhaps many, politicians, lisw: liberal, Republican, conservative, Democrat, or any mutation thereof.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168679 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text> I am quite aware of the dual tactics of dismissing an opposing view with the old faithful blanket statement, "Oh you're just in the tank for >fill-in-the-blank< ", while trying to maneuver the opposition into self-defense rather than have to actually argue a position with facts. It's a tired tactic of those with little else in the fact-based arsenal. But I'll admit all too often they do work, so I can see where one might resort to them almost exclusively. I realize it's unsporting of me, but I'm sorry, Hippy don't play dat.
My particular interest is and always has been to rebut willful ignorance and gratuitous smear, from my first day here. I've done the same any way it flies, as I did against the 9/11 truthers, the Impeach Bush screamers, and the My Pet Goat squealers. I've said it a hundred times - in a representative democracy, we get the government we deserve. We can't say a word about lies in government when we engage and tolerate it amongst ourselves. But we do anyway,'cos we got our rahts. Right? So, Big Surprise! Our government is just like us!
It ain't up to me all the chimp-scat has only been flying one way the last five years. I'm just doin' my thing any ol' way. A'ight?
I didn't know that Benghazi was about YOU, but okay.
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168680 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>You are just so wrong. We can tolerate the cheating and the lying and the blow jobs and the broken promises until someone dies for those things. Benghazi is the only thing I care about. The rest is just politics as usual.

If anyone could have used it to political advantage it would have been Romney but he refused to do so. You may be able to imagine people using dead sons, husbands and brothers as pawns but it is totally off my radar screen and I think it is off those who are trying to get to the bottom of this.
I'm sorry, but I have to call call bullsh!t.

There have been nine (9) "Congressional investigations" thus far. Tell me please, what security revisions enhancements have resulted? Name just one. And tell me what Republican members say when asked. I'll bet you haven't a clue. Here's a clue: "After....".

Romney refused to do so? Are you serious? Do you really have that short a memory, or are you auditioning for O'Reilly as a "fact-checker"? News from the campaign trail: Romney was waving the bloody shirt while the bodies were still warm! C'mon.......

Listen, it would be one thing if something/anything substantive had resulted from 9 (nine) investigations by now. But it has not, because Issa et al don't want it to, because they know you all don't really care about truth. All anyone wants to do is parade around some dead bodies whose names are largely forgotten for at least 2 more years and chant, "Scandal, scandal, sis-boom-bah, scandal, scandal, rah-rah-rah!". When the majority release their report first, not to the ranking members of the minority, but to Fox News, what does that say to you?

Two lifelong dedicated civil servants testified today, and their pertinent testimony was posted. Without knowing anything more about these individuals, you all immediately joined in chorus, "Cover-up!" You all don't want truth, you want political blood. Are you actually oblivious to how the accusations have morphed from Obama to Clinton? Which one may or may not be running for something before long?

C'mon, at least Valynda is honest about it.

Here's more fodder for your "Cover-up!". This time from the Stevens family:

“Chris was not willing to be the kind of diplomat who would strut around in fortified compounds. He amazed and impressed the Libyans by walking the streets with the lightest of escorts, sitting in sidewalk cafes, chatting with passers-by. There was a risk to being accessible. He knew it, and he accepted it.

What Chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be used for political purposes......

Chris would not have wanted to be remembered as a victim. Chris knew, and accepted, that he was working under dangerous circumstances. He did so — just as so many of our diplomatic and development professionals do every day — because he believed the work was vitally important. He would have wanted the critical work he was doing to build bridges of mutual understanding and respect — the kind of work that made him literally thousands of friends and admirers across the broader Middle East — to continue.”

I know, I know. Obama/Clinton got to them too. Cover-up!!
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168681 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>I didn't know that Benghazi was about YOU, but okay.
Like clockwork.....

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168682 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>I'm sorry, but I have to call call bullsh!t.
There have been nine (9) "Congressional investigations" thus far. Tell me please, what security revisions enhancements have resulted? Name just one. And tell me what Republican members say when asked. I'll bet you haven't a clue. Here's a clue: "After....".
Romney refused to do so? Are you serious? Do you really have that short a memory, or are you auditioning for O'Reilly as a "fact-checker"? News from the campaign trail: Romney was waving the bloody shirt while the bodies were still warm! C'mon.......
Listen, it would be one thing if something/anything substantive had resulted from 9 (nine) investigations by now. But it has not, because Issa et al don't want it to, because they know you all don't really care about truth. All anyone wants to do is parade around some dead bodies whose names are largely forgotten for at least 2 more years and chant, "Scandal, scandal, sis-boom-bah, scandal, scandal, rah-rah-rah!". When the majority release their report first, not to the ranking members of the minority, but to Fox News, what does that say to you?
Two lifelong dedicated civil servants testified today, and their pertinent testimony was posted. Without knowing anything more about these individuals, you all immediately joined in chorus, "Cover-up!" You all don't want truth, you want political blood. Are you actually oblivious to how the accusations have morphed from Obama to Clinton? Which one may or may not be running for something before long?
C'mon, at least Valynda is honest about it.
Here's more fodder for your "Cover-up!". This time from the Stevens family:
“Chris was not willing to be the kind of diplomat who would strut around in fortified compounds. He amazed and impressed the Libyans by walking the streets with the lightest of escorts, sitting in sidewalk cafes, chatting with passers-by. There was a risk to being accessible. He knew it, and he accepted it.
What Chris never would have accepted was the idea that his death would be used for political purposes......
Chris would not have wanted to be remembered as a victim. Chris knew, and accepted, that he was working under dangerous circumstances. He did so — just as so many of our diplomatic and development professionals do every day — because he believed the work was vitally important. He would have wanted the critical work he was doing to build bridges of mutual understanding and respect — the kind of work that made him literally thousands of friends and admirers across the broader Middle East — to continue.”
I know, I know. Obama/Clinton got to them too. Cover-up!!
And another family member said that she saw finger marks on a wall in blood and just wanted to know if they were her son's. She just wants to know what happened. I think she deserves to know. I wouldn't have given this as much scrutiny if from the get go there were not lies. Everyone including Obama knew immediately it was not a tape. To dishonor those who died with a lie because it was election time is unforgivable. Talk about making it political.
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168684 Sep 19, 2013
The House Benghazi Inquisition Committee demanded an internal State investigation, and when they got it, they implicitly demanded they go back and don't return until they had a President or Presidential candidate on a pike.

Virginia Congressman Gerald Connolly, who just lost three constituents at the Navy Yard, expressed disappointment at House Republicans’ persistence to find fault in the Accountability Review Board’s report.“I don’t remember any investigation [after the 1983 Lebanon embassy bombing], I don’t remember any charges, I don’t remember the Democrats exploiting Ronald Reagan’s management of that incident. We understood it was a national tragedy, and we tried to come together,” Connolly said.

He added about the continuing Benghazi investigation,“The agenda isn’t getting at the truth, it’s getting at somebody.”
HipGnozizzz

Altona, IL

#168685 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>And another family member said that she saw finger marks on a wall in blood and just wanted to know if they were her son's. She just wants to know what happened. I think she deserves to know. I wouldn't have given this as much scrutiny if from the get go there were not lies. Everyone including Obama knew immediately it was not a tape. To dishonor those who died with a lie because it was election time is unforgivable. Talk about making it political.
The fact that you choose not to respond to any point made that doesn't have an answer that conforms to your "scandal" is just proof of what I'm saying. It's not expected that you would concede, but the fact that you staunchly refuse to even acknowledge any mitigating evidence at all is further proof. You don't want all pertinent facts, you want only factoids that conform to a predetermined conclusion.

For a year now, Issa and others have proclaimed the very next testimony was going to "blow the lid off". Just this Tuesday, again we were going to get "clear evidence" of a cover-up in Wednesday's testimony.

And every single time, when it turns out to more hot air, they immediately repeat "cover-up."

Some people honestly don't know when they're being played. Others just like the tune.

“Unemployed Bush 5.3 obama 8.7”

Since: Jul 10

Labor Participation Rate 63.0%

#168686 Sep 19, 2013
These are creepy opt-out of obamacare ads, but funny.

&fe ature=player_embedded

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168687 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>The fact that you choose not to respond to any point made that doesn't have an answer that conforms to your "scandal" is just proof of what I'm saying. It's not expected that you would concede, but the fact that you staunchly refuse to even acknowledge any mitigating evidence at all is further proof. You don't want all pertinent facts, you want only factoids that conform to a predetermined conclusion.
For a year now, Issa and others have proclaimed the very next testimony was going to "blow the lid off". Just this Tuesday, again we were going to get "clear evidence" of a cover-up in Wednesday's testimony.
And every single time, when it turns out to more hot air, they immediately repeat "cover-up."
Some people honestly don't know when they're being played. Others just like the tune.
Again about you. Really Hip I'm serious, you don't see how both those posts were not about facts or even opinions, they were about how you post with integrity and I don't respond line by line as you seem to think you deserve. That's hardly worth responding to.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168688 Sep 19, 2013
Hip you can continue to put your fingers in your ears and repeat over and over, "there was nothing wrong with Benghazi" but I'm just going to watch it unfold. You will not see anything wrong with the way this administration works. I know that so we have nothing to talk about.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168689 Sep 19, 2013
BobinTX wrote:
These are creepy opt-out of obamacare ads, but funny.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v =R7cRsfW0Jv8XX&feature=pla yer_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
ugh!

“I'm here with bells on.”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

#168690 Sep 19, 2013
lisw wrote:
<quoted text>Again about you. Really Hip I'm serious, you don't see how both those posts were not about facts or even opinions, they were about how you post with integrity and I don't respond line by line as you seem to think you deserve. That's hardly worth responding to.
From Hip's post:

"you staunchly refuse to even acknowledge any mitigating evidence at all is further proof. You don't want all pertinent facts, you want only factoids that conform to a predetermined conclusion."

I think it was more about YOU, than about him. And he's spot on about YOU, as usual.

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#168691 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>
My particular interest is and always has been to rebut willful ignorance and gratuitous smear, from my first day here. I've done the same any way it flies, as I did against the 9/11 truthers, the Impeach Bush screamers, and the My Pet Goat squealers. I've said it a hundred times - in a representative democracy, we get the government we deserve.
Your self-appointed schtick to monitor "ignorance & smear" mean NOTHING to me. Yer just another Obama zombie trying desperately
to shield the emperor and his minions. Folks who're confident
that this admin is being railroaded and misunderstood, don't
squawk anywhere near as much as you do. For whatever reason.

The Issa investigations continue because NO ONE on the Blue Team has the slightest interest in telling the truth, starting with "what difference does it make" HClinton, all the way down to
these loser Reps walking out on the victims' relatives who just want to know what exactly happened, and WHO is responsible.

The fact that it happened on Obama's watch is more than just a little coincidental. I can't recall in recent history of ANY US President getting himself and his admin in this much chaos, one right after the other, most, seemingly after he no longer had to worry about being reelected.

So you stay up there on the podium and flap yer beak all ya want. That'll gimme a much easier target to wing some rotten wormy tomatoes at.

Since: Jun 08

Location hidden

#168692 Sep 19, 2013
Smooch!

“Custer @ LBH - Ooops”

Since: Nov 07

Bakersfield, CA

#168693 Sep 19, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>Like clockwork.....
Yeah yer a DEEP prophet. But as yer protege has shown, any baboon on a board like this can make "eerily similar" predictions.

I'd a thought you were above such nonsense.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168694 Sep 20, 2013
HipGnozizzz wrote:
<quoted text>Bless your honesty.
Because THIS is what it's about, and always has been. It ain't got nothing to do with security. When asked about security and process fixes, various Republicans have said, "We'll deal with that after...". After, they said.
And it's got nothing to do with brave Americans, three of which not one in 10,000 can even name, even after 13 months of ravenous attention. Nothing at all to do with their lives, and tragic deaths. Never did.
It's all to do with, "How can we keep these bodies from mouldering just long enough to turn their deaths to political advantage?"
It has EVERYTHING to do with security and try telling the family members it has nothing to do with those 4 brave Americans, Hip because I guarantee you their mothers will tell you it's ALL about those 4 brave Americans and I'm equally confident they can tell you what their names were. Those family members want answers, they are desperate for answers & details and Obama promised them they would be forthcoming when they met at Andrews Air force base. Do you know how many details they have a year later? None.

The video story Obama & Co. peddled for weeks on the national stage and later at the UN was the gigantic lie they trumpeted hoping to quiet the madding crowd and it was the first clue something was really, really screwy. Ask yourself why they came up with that bogus story and then tell me with a straight face there is nothing further to discuss. People including presidents don't LIE without reason and once a lie has been uncovered it's natural for normal people to want the truth, especially when dead people are involved.

It's curious the libs can employ the slightly loony Cindy Sheehan rallying your party with her beating of the drum looking for GW's head and pitching her little pup tent outside his home in TX but heaven forbid when people on the opposing team who smell something rotten make an effort to pursue it.
When you do it, it's righteous.
When republicans do it, it's political.
====

Someone is directly to blame for the failings at Benghazi and your lack of curiosity of who that might be and your willingness to just shrug the whole thing off is either political or abnormal. Take your pick.
Lyndi

Sarasota, FL

#168695 Sep 20, 2013
Sister Kathryn Lust wrote:
<quoted text>From Hip's post:
"you staunchly refuse to even acknowledge any mitigating evidence at all is further proof. You don't want all pertinent facts, you want only factoids that conform to a predetermined conclusion."
I think it was more about YOU, than about him. And he's spot on about YOU, as usual.
Do you think you could just tell Hip in a personal message you have the Topix hots for him so we can move past your one woman cheerleading squad? Seriously, if you're not posting sexual innuendos with the stupid little smiley faces ad nauseum to the guy, you're whipping out your pom poms and screaming, "Give me an H!". I gotta tell you, it's absolutely god awful to watch.

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
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 4 min dirty white boy- 602,182
100%ProfitBot 10 min OscarM 1
The Intense Power Behind The New World Order...... 28 min bubba burpalot 21
Come on Toshi Sanyo 30 min bubba burpalot 10
9/11 Was An Inside Job 35 min bubba burpalot 28
ebola gay snapchat incest bestiality nwo pedo c... 37 min bubba burpalot 5
Nine Eleven 37 min bubba burpalot 141
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 1 hr truth 548,705
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 1 hr bacon hater 750,701
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 1 hr MUQ1 261,680
Have any girls on here had sex with a dog??? (Feb '12) 8 hr chevyguy 127

Top Stories People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE