Benghazi: six months later

[DJofSD]

The chair is still empty.

[mostpost]

The chair is still empty.
What chair? The chair where you sit to think?

[JustRalph]

Disgusting, dereliction of duty on so many levels.

If GW was in office we would be in impeachment talks.

Extraordinary display of the true feelings the left has for the military, diplomats and anyone else they can ignore and or abuse to maintain power. Wholesale abdication of responsibility furthered by the the same attitude taken by the complicit media.

History will not be kind to this President and his minions. When they are no longer in power the daggers will come out. In fact I predict the last two years of his Presidency will be open season on his failures and gross incompetence. The flailing feeling his base will start to feel as they run out of time could be very dangerous to him.

The attempts to move their passion on to Hillary will be the biggest side show in the world.

[NJ Stinks]

Disgusting, dereliction of duty on so many levels.

If GW was in office we would be in impeachment talks.



Impeachment for what? Four people died. In a dangerous place.

Your disgust is neverending, apparently.

[hcap]

Disgusting, dereliction of duty on so many levels.

If GW was in office we would be in impeachment talks.
Thank goodness GW is no longer in office.
Question: Can we impeach him anyway? :)

Benghazi has no legs.
PS: you gents should have a word with Clint about empty chairs
......Worked so well at the convention

[Stillriledup]

Impeachment for what? Four people died. In a dangerous place.

Your disgust is neverending, apparently.

Exactly.

[horses4courses]

Thank goodness GW is no longer in office.
Question: Can we impeach him anyway? :)

Benghazi has no legs.
PS: you gents should have a word with Clint about empty chairs
......Worked so well at the convention

What are the odds of Clint being asked back for the next GOP convention?

[thaskalos]

What are the odds of Clint being asked back for the next GOP convention?

About the same as the republicans winning the presidency.

[horses4courses]

About the same as the republicans winning the presidency.

Can you parlay those two propositions? ;)

[JustRalph]

They had a tin ear. The now dead ambassador was practically begging for help and nobody at all listened. That is dereliction and it resulted in four deaths. Plain and simple.

If it was Bush they would find a way to make it criminal. We would be far along in the process of State Department resignations and there would be a campaign of disgrace against Republicans.

Not this Prez, he's Golden...........

[cj's dad]

They had a tin ear. The now dead ambassador was practically begging for help and nobody at all listened. That is dereliction and it resulted in four deaths. Plain and simple.

If it was Bush they would find a way to make it criminal. We would be far along in the process of State Department resignations and there would be a campaign of disgrace against Republicans.

Not this Prez, he's Golden...........

No Ralph--- He's black- fire away Libs

[horses4courses]

No Ralph--- He's black- fire away Libs

Beats mulatto, I guess.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Beats mulatto, I guess.

You really do miss Mack.

[riskman]

http://www.gopusa.com/cartoons/files/2013/01/mr500_130125.jpg


This was Hillary's comment. Looks like nothing has changed.

[Stillriledup]

They had a tin ear. The now dead ambassador was practically begging for help and nobody at all listened. That is dereliction and it resulted in four deaths. Plain and simple.

If it was Bush they would find a way to make it criminal. We would be far along in the process of State Department resignations and there would be a campaign of disgrace against Republicans.

Not this Prez, he's Golden...........

I thought there was 3,000+ deaths...or, maybe that's 9/11 that i'm thinking about?

[rastajenk]

I don't think Bush was preparing for a campaign event in Las Vegas as 9/11 was happening. And I don't recall him maintaining his regular schedule in spite of what was going on. There is no comparison.

[hcap]

What a crock. No instead he was reading a CIA briefing a number of months before, telling him Bin Laden was determined to strike.

[fast4522]

What are the odds of Clint being asked back for the next GOP convention?


Significantly greater than a certain lefty being alive four year from now.

[hcap]

Significantly greater than a certain lefty being alive four year from now.Are you planning to post him to death? :lol:

[fast4522]

Everything comes full circle.
Here is a tune for ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsLqL8lDN80&list=AL94UKMTqg-9DxCYGAvD67lTmBsERY1_WG

[Capper Al]

The chair is still empty.

Can you differentiate substance from noise? The Repubs want to give Benghazi a Watergate or Iran Contra feel of importance. Take a step back and ask yourself are these of the same importance? With Benghazi you have a fool on his own running around in a country during a war. He gets shoot for his carelessness. With Watergate and Iran Contra, there is a conspiracy going on by the Repubs. Fox news threw a lot of money at making something out of Benghazi. Sometimes thinking that there is two sides to an argument is just wrong. In this case it is.

[Tom]

So the deaths in Benghazi mean nothing to the left.
You guys are a disgrace to this nation, no, this species.

[Capper Al]

So the deaths in Benghazi mean nothing to the left.
You guys are a disgrace to this nation, no, this species.

I didn't say that. I'm addressing the political issue. I do regret their deaths, and always wish people in harms way use good judgement.

Jumping to the beat of Fox news and making like there is a political issue here is nonsense. Defending the issue as if you care is false bravado.

[burnsy]

Can you differentiate substance from noise? The Repubs want to give Benghazi a Watergate or Iran Contra feel of importance. Take a step back and ask yourself are these of the same importance? With Benghazi you have a fool on his own running around in a country during a war. He gets shoot for his carelessness. With Watergate and Iran Contra, there is a conspiracy going on by the Repubs. Fox news threw a lot of money at making something out of Benghazi. Sometimes thinking that there is two sides to an argument is just wrong. In this case it is.

Very accurate...because there are not two sides. There is only one and its the attitude that we run or are responsible for everything that happens in this world. The illusion is to get the public arguing over what both sides would of done anyway. Everytime you read these threads you see the "lefty", "righty" crap........as if theres a difference. Obama has done everything Bush would of done...one guys black the other is white,,,,thats about the only difference. Ther country is woefully off track and we stick our noses in every conflict that pops up as if the president is steering these decisions. Gee, everywhere we go seems to have oil....i wonder why? People are so gullible if you get them arguing they are blind to what goes on. Can you say the Roman Empire part two? Ceasar and his senate would be proud of our foreign policy, it closely resembles theirs.....while the people went to the arena to watch gladiators...we have morons here that watch FOX News and MSNBC as the country slowly goes bankrupt and loses all credibility. The simularities are remarkable, people are getting lazy, fat and think we run the world. I hope i'm not around for the awakening because it won't be pretty...people will still be casting blame and pointing fingers, instead of thinking for themselves..we done got ourselves in this situation by following the money hungry, power hungry powers that run us.....Obama will be gone in three years, Bush has been gone for about 5....people think the next guy/gal will be any different? Not until they wake up and demand it, but like most sheep they won't. The kings and robber barons rule again and soon the people will eat cake....at least they can still bitch over which "party" is worse...so they feel like they control something..........:bang: ........:lol: I'm waiting to see if the bottom falls out on the dollar...if that happens, who are people going to blame....the republicans? the democrats? they have to because most people live in denial....they won't look in the mirror...its a free country but they gave the keys to the morons that run either side. Some of these people contribute to both parties just to cover their bets...while the people sit there and believe theres some sort of "principle" involved...:lol:

[Greyfox]

I didn't say that. I'm addressing the political issue. I do regret their deaths, and always wish people in harms way use good judgement.

Jumping to the beat of Fox news and making like there is a political issue here is nonsense. Defending the issue as if you care is false bravado.

It is not a political issue - although the White House coverup made it one.

The fact is it is an issue of incompetence and negligence of the Commander in Chief. He never took the 3 am call.

[Tom]

The political slant here is that FOX gets called out for reporting the truth.
It is now political to expect competency from our elected and appointed officials?

[PaceAdvantage]

What a crock. No instead he was reading a CIA briefing a number of months before, telling him Bin Laden was determined to strike.Yes, but Obama was actually getting calls for HELP MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK.

Help to a SPECIFIC LOCATION...Bush had no such advance warning in that memo, despite what you'd like us to believe.

bin Laden determined to attack? Ummmmm....DUH....we knew that since the Clinton administration or maybe earlier....what year was bin Laden interviewed on 60 minutes?

I always love when you and others whip out that meaningless 9/11 memo, as if it's some sort of smoking gun...

The fact of the matter is that Bush would have to have been getting calls from Giuliani to protect lower Manhattan weeks prior to 9/11 (calls that Bush would have IGNORED just like Obama did) for their to be any sort of equivalence between the two events.

[horses4courses]

Significantly greater than a certain lefty being alive four year from now.

Care to elaborate?

[Tom]

Easier to re-argue all the old crap than to have face the current crap.
A new form of dodging.

[hcap]

Easier to re-argue all the old crap than to have face the current crap.
A new form of dodging.The 10th anniversary of Bushes invasion and war is officially the 19th of this month. Compared to Iraq, Benghazi is a minor pimple turned into WWIII by Faux and friends

[DJofSD]

The 10th anniversary of Bushes invasion and war is officially the 19th of this month. Compared to Iraq, Benghazi is a minor pimple turned into WWIII by Faux and friends
Start a new thread if you want to talk about that part of history. Otherwise, stay on topic.

[hcap]

Start a new thread if you want to talk about that part of history. Otherwise, stay on topic.OK, Benghazi has been made into a republican talking point and has very little significance.

PS:I was not the first to draw comparisons with bush.
And now that the 19th is approaching I won't be the last. :)

[woodtoo]

6 months later and not a peep out of those rescued,the survivors.
Why is that? No interviews,no accounts from those that were actually there.
Just, move on nothing to see here.:faint:

[woodtoo]

Just, move on nothing to see here.:faint:[/QUOTE]

Kidding.

[fast4522]

Care to elaborate?

Sure,

Unlike your private message here at Pace Advantage, I do not expect everyone who posts here to be around in four years due to natural causes or to even vote in that general election. Everyone who hits 60 has one foot on a banana skin and over 70 two feet. The point is why can people advocate spending us into oblivion if they know that they will not be around to help pay it back.

[horses4courses]

Sure,

Unlike your private message here at Pace Advantage, I do not expect everyone who posts here to be around in four years due to natural causes or to even vote in that general election. Everyone who hits 60 has one foot on a banana skin and over 70 two feet. The point is why can people advocate spending us into oblivion if they know that they will not be around to help pay it back.

I just turned 55 a couple of weeks ago, with every intention of sticking around on this planet for at least 30 more years.
I realize that Mr. Eastwood, and most who post on PA OTG, are more advanced in years.
So, making it to another GOP convention may be a stretch for some.
Difficult to have gathered that from your post, though.

My apologies for reading your post, and taking it as a threat.
So glad that it's not. In fact, it's probably a good thing for both of us.

Here's to us all seeing many more GOP conventions. :ThmbUp:

[mostpost]

Yes, but Obama was actually getting calls for HELP MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK.
No, he was not. Request for increased security were being sent to the appropriate officials at the State Department. They did not go to Obama. They did not go to Hillary Clinton. They were handled by the security division of the State Department. You can argue that they were handled incorrectly and not get much of an argument from me. But arguing that Obama was even aware of the requests or should have been is like blaming him if a secretary at the Commerce Department spills a cup of coffee. Oh wait, you would blame him for that.

[rastajenk]

That's pretty weak, even by your standards.

[JustRalph]

No, he was not. Request for increased security were being sent to the appropriate officials at the State Department. They did not go to Obama. They did not go to Hillary Clinton. They were handled by the security division of the State Department. You can argue that they were handled incorrectly and not get much of an argument from me. But arguing that Obama was even aware of the requests or should have been is like blaming him if a secretary at the Commerce Department spills a cup of coffee. Oh wait, you would blame him for that.

And they all still have their job (shuffled around a little) and nobody has been fired. That is a disgrace. Hilary runs the place. She should have been fired. Just like every other political hack gets fired when people die on their watch. But Hil is the great white hope coming down the line. Simple as that.

[mostpost]

Yes, but Obama was actually getting calls for HELP MONTHS BEFORE THE ATTACK.

Help to a SPECIFIC LOCATION...Bush had no such advance warning in that memo, despite what you'd like us to believe.

bin Laden determined to attack? Ummmmm....DUH....we knew that since the Clinton administration or maybe earlier....what year was bin Laden interviewed on 60 minutes?

I always love when you and others whip out that meaningless 9/11 memo, as if it's some sort of smoking gun...

The fact of the matter is that Bush would have to have been getting calls from Giuliani to protect lower Manhattan weeks prior to 9/11 (calls that Bush would have IGNORED just like Obama did) for their to be any sort of equivalence between the two events.

It wasn't just the Aug 6 memo. There were similar reports on May 1, June 22, June 29, July 1, and July 24. There may not have been specifics in any of those reports, but there is also no evidence that anyone in the Bush administration tried to get specifics. The White House committee on terrorism, which was supposed to be headed by Dick Cheney, did not meet one time during that period. Reports were received that known terrorists were in the United States but no attempt was made to find them. The FBI was instructed to look into potential sleeper cells, but no follow up was ever done to see if they were doing as instructed. No attempt was made to see that pieces of information in the hands of one agency was available to another, and no plan to coordinate that information was being followed.

The truth is that the neocons in the Bush administration were not interested in any warnings because they were obsessed with Saddam Hussein. We could excuse their failure to uncover the plot if we had any evidence that they were diligently searching. In fact we have strong evidence that they were not.

[woodtoo]

CIA whom were nearby offered to help but were told to stand down (not by BO he was :sleeping:)
A General on a warship was told to stand down,when he ignored this request he was relieved of his duty.They did not want any one to find out this CIA safe house was being used as a gun running op.

[johnhannibalsmith]

...The truth is that the neocons in the Bush administration were not interested in any warnings because they were obsessed with Saddam Hussein. We could excuse their failure to uncover the plot if we had any evidence that they were diligently searching. In fact we have strong evidence that they were not.

Anyone want to rewrite this paragraph with a few substitutions for names and reasons?

[woodtoo]

It wasn't just the Aug 6 memo. There were similar reports on May 1, June 22, June 29, July 1, and July 24. There may not have been specifics in any of those reports, but there is also no evidence that anyone in the Bush administration tried to get specifics. The White House committee on terrorism, which was supposed to be headed by Dick Cheney, did not meet one time during that period. Reports were received that known terrorists were in the United States but no attempt was made to find them. The FBI was instructed to look into potential sleeper cells, but no follow up was ever done to see if they were doing as instructed. No attempt was made to see that pieces of information in the hands of one agency was available to another, and no plan to coordinate that information was being followed.

The truth is that the neocons in the Bush administration were not interested in any warnings because they were obsessed with Saddam
Hussein. We could excuse their failure to uncover the plot if we had any evidence that they were diligently searching. In fact we have strong evidence that they were not.

WE know It was Bush's fault :faint:

[elysiantraveller]

Anyone want to rewrite this paragraph with a few substitutions for names and reasons?

Happily...

...The truth is that the neocons in the Obama administration were not interested in any warnings because they were obsessed with getting re-elected. We could excuse their failure to uncover the failure if we had any evidence that they were diligently searching. In fact we have strong evidence that they vilify those who do.

:cool:

[Tom]

OK, Benghazi has been made into a republican talking point and has very little significance.

Tell that to the parents.

[fast4522]

I just turned 55 a couple of weeks ago, with every intention of sticking around on this planet for at least 30 more years.
I realize that Mr. Eastwood, and most who post on PA OTG, are more advanced in years.
So, making it to another GOP convention may be a stretch for some.
Difficult to have gathered that from your post, though.

My apologies for reading your post, and taking it as a threat.
So glad that it's not. In fact, it's probably a good thing for both of us.

Here's to us all seeing many more GOP conventions. :ThmbUp:

So we are both pushing 60, from our combined posts of 6000 there is enough there to suggest that we are not into Big Pharma yet and have many years to go before we take the dirt nap right? By the same token there is more than enough data there to draw a profile of someone's general health and age who is the opposition right? Now let us fast forward a bit into hyperinflation in a few years, do you really think that we are going to back off any. And if not why start now, see you there horses4courses.

[PaceAdvantage]

Care to elaborate?I didn't get it either...sounds kinda ominous though...I'm kinda scared...you?

[PaceAdvantage]

No, he was not. Request for increased security were being sent to the appropriate officials at the State Department. They did not go to Obama. They did not go to Hillary Clinton. They were handled by the security division of the State Department. You can argue that they were handled incorrectly and not get much of an argument from me. But arguing that Obama was even aware of the requests or should have been is like blaming him if a secretary at the Commerce Department spills a cup of coffee. Oh wait, you would blame him for that.I knew someone was going to take that line literally, and I almost changed it, but I figured I'd leave it to see if my hunch would pan out...you did NOT disappoint!!

I also stupidly forgot that with this administration, there is no "buck stops here," so once again, even though it's OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION (which is what I meant), according to you, HE'S OFF THE HOOK BECAUSE HE PERSONALLY WAS NOT CALLED.

Pardon me while I laugh my ass off at your nonsense...

[PaceAdvantage]

The truth is that the neocons in the Bush administration were not interested in any warnings because they were obsessed with Saddam Hussein. We could excuse their failure to uncover the plot if we had any evidence that they were diligently searching. In fact we have strong evidence that they were not.I think you should just come out and endorse the fringe liberal theory that they WANTED IT TO HAPPEN, and that's why "they weren't looking," according to you and your sources...

[hcap]

I didn't get it either...sounds kinda ominous though...I'm kinda scared...you?That is why I asked him if he was going to post us to death. :) Not too much of a stretch, for me to think it was personal.

[fast4522]

Heck, I even bet on the Kentucky Derby every year even thought I am wrong about my selection at times.

[hcap]

Heck, I even bet on the Kentucky Derby every year even thought I am wrong about my selection at times.You know Life Insurance companies have actuarial tables. Maybe you missed your true calling?

BTW, I don't understand the point of pointing out some of us might die.

And?

[Capper Al]

Tell that to the parents.

You care so much. You must be a bleeding heart.

[DJofSD]

I knew someone was going to take that line literally, and I almost changed it, but I figured I'd leave it to see if my hunch would pan out...you did NOT disappoint!!

I also stupidly forgot that with this administration, there is no "buck stops here," so once again, even though it's OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION (which is what I meant), according to you, HE'S OFF THE HOOK BECAUSE HE PERSONALLY WAS NOT CALLED.

Pardon me while I laugh my ass off at your nonsense...
Spot on, Mike, spot on.

[Tom]

Truman - The buck stops here.
Obama - The buck starts here.

Kennedy - Ask not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your country
Obama - Ask not.

[woodtoo]

Suspect under arrest in Libya,Al Chalabi Faraj.How long before J.Kerry sends in the hounds?:rolleyes: They really need to clear this up,fast.

[Tom]

Kerry will send him a personal apology for the "video."

[woodtoo]

It's too late for apologies Tom.:D

[mostpost]

I knew someone was going to take that line literally, and I almost changed it, but I figured I'd leave it to see if my hunch would pan out...you did NOT disappoint!!

I also stupidly forgot that with this administration, there is no "buck stops here," so once again, even though it's OBAMA'S ADMINISTRATION (which is what I meant), according to you, HE'S OFF THE HOOK BECAUSE HE PERSONALLY WAS NOT CALLED.

Pardon me while I laugh my ass off at your nonsense...
I took it literally because blaming Obama for everything is what you do. If you meant Obama administration you should have written that. The president is never off the hook, but Obama did not give orders that no additional security be sent to Benghazi. Nor did he review that decision. The buck did not stop with Obama. It stopped before Obama.

[mostpost]

I think you should just come out and endorse the fringe liberal theory that they WANTED IT TO HAPPEN, and that's why "they weren't looking," according to you and your sources...
I wouldn't say they wanted an attack on the World Trade Center which killed 3,000 people. But I direct your attention to a document called "Project for a New American Century," This is what has come to be known as the Neocon bible. One of the chapters of "Project for a New American Century" was "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century" written in part by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz; two key members of the Bush foreign policy team.

A quote from that chapter.
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolunionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event -- like a new Pearl Harbor. ...
That sure sounds to me like someone who wouldn't mind a catastrophe to take advantage of.

[Capper Al]

Let's keep this thread going. The independents see through this BS and the right. As long as they want to talk about it, let them go. It means more votes for the left.

[hcap]

I wouldn't say they wanted an attack on the World Trade Center which killed 3,000 people. But I direct your attention to a document called "Project for a New American Century," This is what has come to be known as the Neocon bible. One of the chapters of "Project for a New American Century" was "Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategies, Forces and Resources for a New Century" written in part by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz; two key members of the Bush foreign policy team.

A quote from that chapter.

That sure sounds to me like someone who wouldn't mind a catastrophe to take advantage of.The Downing Street Memo - actually the minutes of a prime minister's meeting in July 2002 - in which the chief of British overseas intelligence briefed his colleagues about his recent trip to Washington.

"Bush wanted to remove Saddam," says the memo, "through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and W.M.D. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." It doesn't get much clearer than that.

I am sure The Bush Administration took advantage of 911 to go after Saddam.

[woodtoo]

Let's keep this thread going. The independents see through this BS and the right. As long as they want to talk about it, let them go. It means more votes for the left.


What do the "independents" see through ?I'm missing something here.

33 survivors no names,no ranks,no interviews,no thanking them for their service.Nothing at all, 0 from your zero hero :bang:

[Tom]

2013 calling hcap....2013 calling hcap.
If you are going to hijack threads with totally non-related BS, at least make it current non-related BS.

Or is it that you can't justify the zero-hero and his falling asleep at the switch and allowing our people to be murdered?

We should charge this idiot with murder.
The Clinton bitch, too.

[hcap]

2013 calling hcap....2013 calling hcap.
If you are going to hijack threads with totally non-related BS, at least make it current non-related BS.

Or is it that you can't justify the zero-hero and his falling asleep at the switch and allowing our people to be murdered?

We should charge this idiot with murder.
The Clinton bitch, too.Remember Tom it is now only 4 1/2 days till the 19th

And trhis makes an even 100xs you have called a democratic women a bitch.
Versus my one time calling Sarah a bitch.

Ok, that is 2 :lol:

[JustRalph]

Calling Doctor Bombay!!

[horses4courses]

The glaring parallel between the war in Iraq, and more recent events with unpopular Third World dictators, comes down to one commodity - oil.

Remember when our troops were storming through Iraq, and all you could hear from the less enlightened was "wait until we get our hands on all that oil"?

With the recent death of Chavez in Venezuela, you could bet your bottom dollar that had Romney been our current leader, there would be a determined underground effort funded by this country to overthrow socialism in that nation.
In fact, how underground that effort would have been is questionable, in itself.
Romney, and those around him, would have seen the situation there as an opportunity.
Problem is, it would be another recipe for disaster.

Those on the Right will accuse Obama of being satisfied with a continuation of socialist rule in Venezuela.
To them, he is a socialist himself.
The truth of the matter is this - that country has a right to choose it's own destiny. We, as a nation, do not have the right to interfere with that choice - provided that they are not a direct threat to our citizens - at home, or abroad.

Such foresight would have been beneficial in 2002, and saved many American lives in the process.
The day when the USA needs to police the world has long since passed.
It's a shame that more people don't realize that yet.

[rastajenk]

Remember when our troops were storming through Iraq, and all you could hear from the less enlightened was "wait until we get our hands on all that oil"?
I think you have it totally backwards. All you could hear was "No Blood For Oil," as if that was the sole motive. I don't remember anyone saying with enthusiasm that we were invading Iraq to shake down their oil industry.

[elysiantraveller]

With the recent death of Chavez in Venezuela, you could bet your bottom dollar that had Romney been our current leader, there would be a determined underground effort funded by this country to overthrow socialism in that nation.
In fact, how underground that effort would have been is questionable, in itself.
Romney, and those around him, would have seen the situation there as an opportunity.
Problem is, it would be another recipe for disaster.

Those on the Right will accuse Obama of being satisfied with a continuation of socialist rule in Venezuela.
To them, he is a socialist himself.
The truth of the matter is this - that country has a right to choose it's own destiny. We, as a nation, do not have the right to interfere with that choice - provided that they are not a direct threat to our citizens - at home, or abroad.

:lol:

[horses4courses]

I think you have it totally backwards. All you could hear was "No Blood For Oil," as if that was the sole motive. I don't remember anyone saying with enthusiasm that we were invading Iraq to shake down their oil industry.

Anyone with a clue knew that it would never benefit our oil supply.
Not everyone had a grip on reality at that time, though.

[johnhannibalsmith]

:lol:

Gotta agree, if nothing else, that was entertaining. :D

[Tom]

Not everyone had a grip on reality at that time, though.

You still don't! :lol:

[Capper Al]

What do the "independents" see through ?I'm missing something here.

33 survivors no names,no ranks,no interviews,no thanking them for their service.Nothing at all, 0 from your zero hero :bang:

They were in harms way. They acted foolishly. We all make mistakes. Unfortunately for them, it cost them their life. They should be thanked for their service. Knowing the military, I would count on them being thanked.

The fools on the right think they have something here. They kept beating it and hope something comes out of it. The independents see these as wackos. The more they see them as wackos, the more the pendulum sings to the left. Keep it going righties!

[Tom]

Nothing lower than using the deaths of Americans for your political purposes.
But that is the legacy of the left - they have always disrespected our troops and our diplomats. Now they have sunk to a new low - blaming it on those murdered in service to our country - they were careless.

A new low for OT......and America. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:

[woodtoo]

They were in harms way. They acted foolishly. We all make mistakes. Unfortunately for them, it cost them their life. They should be thanked for their service. Knowing the military, I would count on them being thanked.

The fools on the right think they have something here. They kept beating it and hope something comes out of it. The independents see these as wackos. The more they see them as wackos, the more the pendulum sings to the left. Keep it going righties!

They were in harms way?You mean being in Libya,yes they chose to be there.

They acted foolishly? IF you say being attacked and murdered is foolish:rolleyes:
Clinton, the zero and Rice are the real fools by doing nada to help.

We all make mistakes. So their mistake was what?Being there?

Your so off base here your frickin AWOL.

[elysiantraveller]

They were in harms way. They acted foolishly. We all make mistakes. Unfortunately for them, it cost them their life. They should be thanked for their service. Knowing the military, I would count on them being thanked.

The fools on the right think they have something here. They kept beating it and hope something comes out of it. The independents see these as wackos. The more they see them as wackos, the more the pendulum sings to the left. Keep it going righties!

A CIA installation was involved in a pitched battle for nearly 6 hours that resulted in the combat deaths of 2 Americans there...

But it's wrong to ask what they were doing there and why help wasn't sent?...

I'm sure you felt the 9/11 Commission was just a grand old farce as well... :rolleyes:

[Capper Al]

Keep talking boys. You are doing well!

[elysiantraveller]

Keep talking boys. You are doing well!

Seriously, I asked you a question.

It's wrong to ask what they were doing there and why relief wasn't provided?

Yes or No?

[Capper Al]

Seriously, I asked you a question.

It's wrong to ask what they were doing there and why relief wasn't provided?

Yes or No?

No, it is not. Just don't act surprised when they give their answer.

[elysiantraveller]

No, it is not. Just don't act surprised when they give their answer.

I'll try not to but no promises since they actually haven't provided an answer...

Is it wrong to expect an answer?...

[DJofSD]

Ya, I get it. A death of a citizen, let alone an ambasidor, is to be only regretted when the left does not believe the circumstances warrent a response. The US shouldn't have been there in the first place therefore anything and everything that follows is tainted.

Problem is the left never has any prinicples which would allow them to take a stand. It's all relative.

[mostpost]

Nothing lower than using the deaths of Americans for your political purposes.
But that is the legacy of the left - they have always disrespected our troops and our diplomats. Now they have sunk to a new low - blaming it on those murdered in service to our country - they were careless.

A new low for OT......and America. :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown: :ThmbDown:
You are right. There is nothing lower. So stop doing it. You and your fellow cons here and in Congress are the ones who have been using this tragedy to attack Obama and Hillary Clinton. And doing so without a scintilla of actual evidence.

Now you are all waiting for some magical testimony from thirty three people who are going to tell you exactly what we already know. When that happens you will find something new-and equally insubstantial to hang your hat on. Result? More hats on your floor than on the ice at a typical Blackhawks game.

[Tom]

I don't need any testimony - it is blatantly obvious what happened.
American diplomats were murdered and nothing was done to save them and now it being covered up.

Only a simpleton would think anything else.

And like everything else, the left is trying to blame everyone else but the real murders.

[PaceAdvantage]

It means more votes for the left.And we see how well that panned out in all the inner cities that have gone to shit...and Chicago, where people are being killed left and right despite stringent gun laws...

Yup, the left sure has cured the nations ills, both large and small, from the halls of DC to that little town hall in Detroit... :lol:

Again, pardon me while I laugh my ass off at your nonsense...

More votes for the left...good God man, give your head a shake...

[PaceAdvantage]

The independents see these as wackos.No, the wackos are the ones that knew there were Americans in harms way, were asked to provide more security, and DENIED that request...THAT'S WACKO...

[Tom]

That's murder.

[PaceAdvantage]

They were in harms way.Thanks to Obama and his meddlesome ways...why can't he just leave sovereign nations be?!

Why, some might call what Obama did in Libya "neoconish."

Nah...they wouldn't call it that...they know to keep their mouths shut...

By the way, have you seen this salon.com article?

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/2013/03/barack_obama_promised_transparency_the_white_house _is_as_opaque_secretive.html

[elysiantraveller]

Why, some might call what Obama did in Libya "neoconish."

Nah...they wouldn't call it that...they know to keep their mouths shut...

I would. :cool:

Sanctioning what was apparently a gunrunning CIA outpost (one of many opinions) in Libya would also be considered "neoconing it up" as well... ;)

[PaceAdvantage]

Just fixed my initial post and the subsequent quote to reflect Obama in LIBYA, not IRAQ as I mistakenly wrote...

[elysiantraveller]

Just fixed my initial post and the subsequent quote to reflect Obama in LIBYA, not IRAQ as I mistakenly wrote...

Its really irrelevant...

In foreign policy: Obama = Bush

[Capper Al]

You are right. There is nothing lower. So stop doing it. You and your fellow cons here and in Congress are the ones who have been using this tragedy to attack Obama and Hillary Clinton. And doing so without a scintilla of actual evidence.

Now you are all waiting for some magical testimony from thirty three people who are going to tell you exactly what we already know. When that happens you will find something new-and equally insubstantial to hang your hat on. Result? More hats on your floor than on the ice at a typical Blackhawks game.

You're right.

[rastajenk]

What is it that we already know? That the guy who has advanced to the highest position in the world by voting "present" was not present when things were going badly? I think some of us would like to hear, under the oath administered in an impeachment proceeding, him admit it. Saying it's merely "a bump in the road" is not good enough.

[elysiantraveller]

You're right.

"It has been claimed that CIA agents on the ground during the deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi twice asked for permission to help Ambassador Chris Stevens and twice were told to stand down.
Furthermore sources present during the deadly six-hour assault have said that a desperate last request for military assistance once the CIA themselves came under attack was denied, even though elite counter-terrorism units were only two hours away.
And it has been claimed there was full communication between the CIA annex in Benghazi and the U.S. military, casting further doubts on the Obama administration's assertion that there wasn't enough information to deploy forces - deepening the crisis over their handling of the attack on September 11th and its aftermath"


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2223747/CIA-agents-Benghazi-twice-asked-permission-help-Ambassador-Chris-Stevens-bullets-flying-twice-told-stand-down.html#ixzz2NoKecteC

I want the names of the people who gave those orders. Their careers need to be over. I also want to know how the chain of command allowed these hacks to be in a decision to make that call.

Is that fair?

[Capper Al]

Might it not have been that the fools were on their own running around in a war?

[johnhannibalsmith]

Might it not have been that the fools were on their own running around in a war?

The "fools" that requested more security because they were on their own in a war and got nothing? Those fools?

[elysiantraveller]

Might it not have been that the fools were on their own running around in a war?

What are you talking about? A CIA facility was under attack for 6 hours... asked for help and no help came.

[Tom]

Might it not have been that the fools were on their own running around in a war?

No, not at all.
Only a FOOL would consider that.
A really BIG FOOL.

[mostpost]

What is it that we already know? That the guy who has advanced to the highest position in the world by voting "present" was not present when things were going badly? I think some of us would like to hear, under the oath administered in an impeachment proceeding, him admit it. Saying it's merely "a bump in the road" is not good enough.
Try reading the Constitution. Article two section four states:
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.
Even of Obama had been guilty of not being present-he was present-it would not be grounds for impeachment. You have to commit a crime to be impeached.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Gerald Ford disagrees.

[mostpost]

What are you talking about? A CIA facility was under attack for 6 hours... asked for help and no help came.

That entire statement shows a lack of knowledge that is appalling. According to both the ARB (State Department) report and the Senate Homeland Security committee report, the security team from the Annex left for the Special Mission compound at 10:04 local (5:04). That was 22 minutes after the attack began. They arrived at 10:25 (5;25), and after a 15 minute firefight, began evacuating the compound to the annex.

BTW the numbers in parentheses are Washington DC time.

At the annex, there were two separate attacks several hours apart, not one continuous attack. The first began about midnight (7PM) and ended at one (8PM). This was not a continuous attack and consisted of small arms fire and some RPgs. The second attack began at 5:14AM (12:14AM). It lasted for 12 minutes during which 5 mortar rounds hit the annex three within 90 seconds, killing Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty. This attack ended at 5:26AM (12:26AM) according to the Senate report. It lasted 12 minutes.

In the meantime, a seven man security team had assembled in Tripoli and flown to Benghazi, arriving at 1:15AM (8:15PM). For reasons that are unclear, this force was held at the Benghazi airport for several hours before being allowed to leave. They arrived at the annex just before the mortar attack began. Approx 5:00AM (12:00AM ). An hour later Libyan government troops arrived and began evacuating the Americans to the airport, then to Tripoli.

Contrary to what is being posted here, officials in Washington were ordering deployments to Benghazi as soon as one hour after the attacks began. Leon Panetta ordered a FAST team platoon stationed in Rota, Spain deployed to Benghazi. He ordered a second FAST platoon sent to a staging area in Italy. He also ordered other special operations units sent to staging areas in Southern Europe.

Also contrary to the opinions of self appointed military experts here, it took the first FAST platoon twenty four hours to arrive in Benghazi.

The ARB report made the following statement on the response to the attacks.
The interagency response was timely and appropriate, but there simply was
not enough time given the speed of the attacksfor armed U.S. military assets to
have made a difference. Senior-level interagency discussions were underway soon
after Washington received initial word of the attacks and continued through the
night. The Board found no evidence of any undue delays in decision making or
denial of support from Washington or from the military combatant commanders.
Quite the contrary: the safe evacuation of all U.S. government personnel from
Benghazi twelve hours after the initial attack and subsequently to Ramstein Air
Force Base was the result of exceptional U.S. government coordination and
military response and helped save the lives of two severely wounded Americans. In
addition, at the State Department’s request, the Department of Defense also
provided a Marine FAST (Fleet Antiterrorism Security Team) as additional
security support for Embassy Tripoli on September 12.
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf page 37.

If you want to keep believing stuff in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, go right ahead.

[elysiantraveller]

That entire statement shows a lack of knowledge that is appalling.

I'm sorry...

5 hours and 26 minutes...

No ****ing air support for 5 hours and 26 minutes...

I don't mean to drop f-bombs on here but that's ****ing ridiculous... I'm glad you are okay with it though...

[PaceAdvantage]

Like that Salon article says, as long as it's Obama, it's ok.

If it had been Bush, they would still be talking about it on MSNBC...

[Robert Goren]

Like that Salon article says, as long as it's Obama, it's ok.

If it had been Bush, they would still be talking about it on MSNBC...If it had been Bush, Fox wouldn't have been talking about.

[PaceAdvantage]

If it had been Bush, Fox wouldn't have been talking about.I'm glad you are finally getting it that no side is better than the other.

With all the FOX bashing on here over the years, it's refreshing to see you come to this realization.

But seeing folks on here try to paint FOX as some sort of evil spreader of lies while the liberal side is pure as the driven snow was getting a bit nauseating.

I like this Salon.com article so much, I'm going to keep referring to it until our most prolific left-leaning contributors cry UNCLE! :lol:

[mostpost]

It is not a political issue - although the White House coverup made it one.

The fact is it is an issue of incompetence and negligence of the Commander in Chief. He never took the 3 am call.

CIA whom were nearby offered to help but were told to stand down (not by BO he was :sleeping
A General on a warship was told to stand down,when he ignored this request he was relieved of his duty.They did not want any one to find out this CIA safe house was being used as a gun running op.

There was no 3AM call because the entire episode took place between 4PM and 1AM Washington time. Apparently you guys never heard of time zones. Benghazi is five hours ahead of Washington DC. Woodtoo, I seriously doubt that Obama was asleep at 5 in the afternoon. If the CIA was told to stand down, how is it that they were on the way to aid the ambassador twenty minutes after the attack began.

"A General on a warship"? Seriously??? Admirals are on warships, not Generals.
What was this General-or Admiral-planning to do? Sail across the desert to Benghazi? Who was this General/Admiral? How about a name? or even a link to the story.

[riskman]

The future coverage of this story by the news media will tell whom does or doesn't have the public's interest at heart. When the final details do come out, and they eventually will; it will be a big tell all of which News agencies actually stand with the people they are supposed to "inform" and which ones play personal politics for favors and access to the executive branch. In the interim,we have four Americans dead partly due to the politics of this administration and their ineffectiveness to properly protect our installation in Benghazi. This installation probably should have been closed when all the turmoil started in Libya.It was an accident waiting to happen and most likely were supporting the militias and providing other support to topple Gaddafi.

[PaceAdvantage]

There was no 3AM call because the entire episode took place between 4PM and 1AM Washington time. Apparently you guys never heard of time zones. Benghazi is five hours ahead of Washington DC. Woodtoo, I seriously doubt that Obama was asleep at 5 in the afternoon. If the CIA was told to stand down, how is it that they were on the way to aid the ambassador twenty minutes after the attack began.

"A General on a warship"? Seriously??? Admirals are on warships, not Generals.
What was this General-or Admiral-planning to do? Sail across the desert to Benghazi? Who was this General/Admiral? How about a name? or even a link to the story.Keep picking at worthless little details while avoiding the bigger picture...

[mostpost]

I'm sorry...

5 hours and 26 minutes...

No ****ing air support for 5 hours and 26 minutes...

I don't mean to drop f-bombs on here but that's ****ing ridiculous... I'm glad you are okay with it though...
You are hopeless. Hopeless and stupid. Air support in a chaotic urban environment. Instead of four dead Americans we would have 37-assuming the story of 33 survivors is true. Dumber than dumb. :mad:

[PaceAdvantage]

You are hopeless. Hopeless and stupid. Air support in a chaotic urban environment. Instead of four dead Americans we would have 37-assuming the story of 33 survivors is true. Dumber than dumb. :mad:It's better that they did nothing...makes the US look strong... :bang: :bang: :bang: :lol: :lol: :lol:

So sad liberals are when it comes to these sorts of things.

Then again, all those Marines died under Reagan's watch too...surprised you haven't pointed this out yet...

[Tom]

If it had been Bush, Fox wouldn't have been talking about.

Yes, the would have.
Obviously, you do not watch FOX. The cover ALL the news.
Why do you pretend to know what you are talking about?

[Tom]

Bottom line, knowing what we KNEW beforehand, the events that took place at that site in the preceding weeks, and knowing it was 9/11, it was 100% inexcusable that they were put in the position of needing help. They should have had adequate security or been evacuated. The big mouths in this thread were all over Bush for not reacting got a vague report that Bin Aden panned and attack, but here, with more than a few specific facts, they try to lie about the reality of it and accuse others of being political for actually acting like Americans and caring, an activity obviously foreign to them. I hope their karma is adequate.

[elysiantraveller]

You are hopeless. Hopeless and stupid. Air support in a chaotic urban environment. Instead of four dead Americans we would have 37-assuming the story of 33 survivors is true. Dumber than dumb. :mad:

I'm not trying to implicate the President in some grand conspiracy here... He wanted to get re-elected and staved this off as well as anyone could have. I get that no one wants a scandal 7 weeks before re-election.

But...

This was an absolute clustermess of epic proportions. Yes, you bring in air support in this situation and I have absolutely no idea what you are talking about in terms of "chaotic urban environment"...

You defend your people... point blank... you defend your people...

[JustRalph]

You are hopeless. Hopeless and stupid. Air support in a chaotic urban environment. Instead of four dead Americans we would have 37-assuming the story of 33 survivors is true. Dumber than dumb. :mad:

Hopeless and stupid? Nice......

Why do you think this way? Fill me in?

What air assets were available? And why would they be in danger? If you're going to call somebody else stupid, back it up?

[elysiantraveller]

Hopeless and stupid? Nice......

Why do you think this way? Fill me in?

What air assets were available? And why would they be in danger? If you're going to call somebody else stupid, back it up?

He can't... he's just reacting.

In 1991 we got to watch a GBU-24 follow someone thru an open doorway but now... "chaotic urban environment"...:rolleyes:

[rastajenk]

You have to commit a crime to be impeached.Every day he wakes up he fulfills that requirement.

[Capper Al]

That entire statement shows a lack of knowledge that is appalling. According to both the ARB (State Department) report and the Senate Homeland Security committee report, the security team from the Annex left for the Special Mission compound at 10:04 local (5:04). That was 22 minutes after the attack began. They arrived at 10:25 (5;25), and after a 15 minute firefight, began evacuating the compound to the annex.

BTW the numbers in parentheses are Washington DC time.

At the annex, there were two separate attacks several hours apart, not one continuous attack. The first began about midnight (7PM) and ended at one (8PM). This was not a continuous attack and consisted of small arms fire and some RPgs. The second attack began at 5:14AM (12:14AM). It lasted for 12 minutes during which 5 mortar rounds hit the annex three within 90 seconds, killing Tyrone Woods and Glenn Doherty. This attack ended at 5:26AM (12:26AM) according to the Senate report. It lasted 12 minutes.

In the meantime, a seven man security team had assembled in Tripoli and flown to Benghazi, arriving at 1:15AM (8:15PM). For reasons that are unclear, this force was held at the Benghazi airport for several hours before being allowed to leave. They arrived at the annex just before the mortar attack began. Approx 5:00AM (12:00AM ). An hour later Libyan government troops arrived and began evacuating the Americans to the airport, then to Tripoli.

Contrary to what is being posted here, officials in Washington were ordering deployments to Benghazi as soon as one hour after the attacks began. Leon Panetta ordered a FAST team platoon stationed in Rota, Spain deployed to Benghazi. He ordered a second FAST platoon sent to a staging area in Italy. He also ordered other special operations units sent to staging areas in Southern Europe.

Also contrary to the opinions of self appointed military experts here, it took the first FAST platoon twenty four hours to arrive in Benghazi.

The ARB report made the following statement on the response to the attacks.

http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/202446.pdf page 37.

If you want to keep believing stuff in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, go right ahead.

Thanks for doing the homework. You nailed it again and again. These wackos like to think: Watergate = Iran Contra = Benghazi -- Not!

Let the fools talk. This is good for the independent voters who want to disassociate themselves with this nonsense. Keep talking Wackos! :lol:

[Tom]

No one is saying what you just made up.
What we are saying is that this could have and should have been prevented, or at least reacted to. We want an investigation as to why, and who, and what will be done to prevent this from happening again.

I suppose going by the way you left-wacko-s are talking, those people getting murdered in Chicago are fools for being there when it known to be a more violent place that Libya, and anyone who dares to suggest we investigate what is going on is being political.

mostie, if someone in your family were shot down in the street there, should it be ignored because they knew the dangers of going out in Chicago?

[Greyfox]

Thanks for doing the homework. You nailed it again and again. These wackos like to think: Watergate = Iran Contra = Benghazi -- Not!

Let the fools talk. This is good for the independent voters who want to disassociate themselves with this nonsense. Keep talking Wackos! :lol:

Wackos? Give your head a shake. You don't seem to understand the issues involved.

Watergate was a criminal activity.
Iran Contra was also a criminal violation of an arms embargo.

Benghazi is about incompetence and neglect by the Government Administration leading to the deaths of Americans.

[woodtoo]

Suspect under arrest in Libya,Al Chalabi Faraj.How long before J.Kerry sends in the hounds?:rolleyes: They really need to clear this up,fast.

The only suspect in custody over the attack.Libyan government officials have allowed U.S.interrogators access to the man,a member of the Libyan Islamist
Fighting Group that tried to overthrow Gadaffi in the 90's.

Have to wonder if we'll ever hear anything more about this.

[Capper Al]

No one is saying what you just made up.
What we are saying is that this could have and should have been prevented, or at least reacted to. We want an investigation as to why, and who, and what will be done to prevent this from happening again.

I suppose going by the way you left-wacko-s are talking, those people getting murdered in Chicago are fools for being there when it known to be a more violent place that Libya, and anyone who dares to suggest we investigate what is going on is being political.

mostie, if someone in your family were shot down in the street there, should it be ignored because they knew the dangers of going out in Chicago?

Who disagrees that mistakes should have been avoided? Mistakes happen. That's all there is to it.

[Capper Al]

Wackos? Give your head a shake. You don't seem to understand the issues involved.

Watergate was a criminal activity.
Iran Contra was also a criminal violation of an arms embargo.

Benghazi is about incompetence and neglect by the Government Administration leading to the deaths of Americans.

Take a breath and get it together. The Repubs spent millions and millions of dollars and a lot of time hound dogging Clinton on a blow job. There are several people invloved not just two like with Billy. If they had whatever they thought could nail Obama for real, they would have do so. These aren't nice people.

Keep it alive wackos. You are doing us on the left well.

[DJofSD]

Who disagrees that mistakes should have been avoided? Mistakes happen. That's all there is to it.
Call them mistakes if you want.

But, whatever label you want to hang on the failures, they were foreseeable and avoidable.

[Tom]

Take a breath and get it together. The Repubs spent millions and millions of dollars and a lot of time hound dogging Clinton on a blow job. There are several people invloved not just two like with Billy. If they had whatever they thought could nail Obama for real, they would have do so. These aren't nice people.

Keep it alive wackos. You are doing us on the left well.

No they didn't.
That is a lie.
But you knew that.

[Capper Al]

No they didn't.
That is a lie.
But you knew that.

What world do you live in? They didn't spend a lot of money and time chasing Billy on his blow job?

Keep talking fools.

[DJofSD]

What world do you live in? They didn't spend a lot of money and time chasing Billy on his blow job?

Keep talking fools.
Ya, he got impeached and disbarred for a BJ. Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

[Tom]

LIV.

[Capper Al]

Ya, he got impeached and disbarred for a BJ. Keep telling yourself that if it makes you feel better.

And they spent a lot of time and money to get Billy. My feelings have nothing to do with that. There was only one witness on Billy. There are surely a lot more witnesses to Benghazi. If Faux News had something on Obama, they would get him. Incompetence and mistakes happen. And if we are talking about incompetence or lying, how does this compare with the weapons of mass destruction? I would that was way more serious.

Keep talking fools. You're helping the left.

[Robert Goren]

And they spent a lot of time and money to get Billy. My feelings have nothing to do with that. There was only one witness on Billy. There are surely a lot more witnesses to Benghazi. If Faux News had something on Obama, they would get him. Incompetence and mistakes happen. And if we are talking about incompetence or lying, how does this compare with the weapons of mass destruction? I would that was way more serious.

Keep talking fools. You're helping the left.Don't worry, the GOP people will repeat the same excuses for the lack of WMDs. But it either comes down to lying or incompetence. In either case, the buck stopped at GWB's desk. Thousands of people died because of it, but they rather push the death of four. Politics at its worst! And they wonder why they can't win the White House.

[Tom]

Al has a new mantra.
I think he is using it to replace "Are we there yet? Are we there yet?"
Nice he and Goren are on the same page.
In the dictionary, that page has a large J in the top corner. :lol:

[Tom]

Don't worry, the GOP people will repeat the same excuses for the lack of WMDs. But it either comes down to lying or incompetence. In either case, the buck stopped at GWB's desk. Thousands of people died because of it, but they rather push the death of four. Politics at its worst! And they wonder why they can't win the White House.

Nice diversion - nothing at all to do with this topic, but then that is all you have to offer, isn't it. You guys had both houses of congress for two years - where was the investigation? No one stopped you. No balls, just mouths? :lol:

Oh, wait, be embarrassing to have investigated that, what with almost every single democrat agreeing the WMDs existed and that Saddam had to go.

Much like the Defense of Marriage Act of 1996.....and how all the dems have suddenly done a 180 on thier core beliefs of the time. We call that whoring. :lol: LIV.

[mostpost]

And they spent a lot of time and money to get Billy. My feelings have nothing to do with that. There was only one witness on Billy. There are surely a lot more witnesses to Benghazi. If Faux News had something on Obama, they would get him. Incompetence and mistakes happen. And if we are talking about incompetence or lying, how does this compare with the weapons of mass destruction? I would that was way more serious.

Keep talking fools. You're helping the left.
The impeachment was for lying under oath about the BJ. In the past folks would have looked the other way. There have been many presidents who fooled around in the past. Harding, FDR, Eisenhower and Kennedy come immediately to mind. Yet none of them was ever called to testify before a grand jury.

It was a desperate ploy by a desperate group. I've lost track of how many "crimes" the Republicans tried to pin on Clinton; Whitewater, Vincent Foster, Paula Jones, etc. None of them came to anything and all of them cost millions-I believe $60M in total.

Even the Lewinski saga came to nothing in the end. Clinton was acquitted and was a better President with one hand tied behind his back than any Republican in the last 100 years.

[Capper Al]

The impeachment was for lying under oath about the BJ. In the past folks would have looked the other way. There have been many presidents who fooled around in the past. Harding, FDR, Eisenhower and Kennedy come immediately to mind. Yet none of them was ever called to testify before a grand jury.

It was a desperate ploy by a desperate group. I've lost track of how many "crimes" the Republicans tried to pin on Clinton; Whitewater, Vincent Foster, Paula Jones, etc. None of them came to anything and all of them cost millions-I believe $60M in total.

Even the Lewinski saga came to nothing in the end. Clinton was acquitted and was a better President with one hand tied behind his back than any Republican in the last 100 years.

Keep it going. Clinton was the best president in our lifetime. That's why Faux beats the drums. The Repubs need scandals to point to so they don't look too bad getting caught in their own.

Let's keep it going. Benghazi, conspiracy, Benghazi, conspiracy, Benghazi, conspiracy!

Go wackos!

[mostpost]

Wackos? Give your head a shake. You don't seem to understand the issues involved.

Watergate was a criminal activity.
Iran Contra was also a criminal violation of an arms embargo.

Benghazi is about incompetence and neglect by the Government Administration leading to the deaths of Americans.

Capper Al and I understand the issues involved. You don't. Let's start from the beginning. American diplomats in Libya, requested additional security for the Embassy and Consulates there. Those request went to the Diplomatic Security Division of the State Department. DS evaluates those requests based on several criteria. Among those is do we have enough money to grant the request? All these decisions had to be made with that in mind.

This is not to say the decisions made were the correct ones. They were obviously not. But they may have been the only ones the officials felt they could make at the time. Also, would it have made any difference if DS had granted every request made by Embassy Tripoli?

The Benghazi SMC was attacked by dozens of armed men, many equipped with RPGs. The annex was also attacked by mortar fire. Would a half dozen more Americans armed with pistols and M4 rifles (that is the armament of ARSOs in Libya) have made a difference. Don't forget, neither ambassador Stevens nor Sean Smith were killed by gunfire. Neither of them was ever in direct contact with the invaders.

They both died from smoke inhalation when they became separated from the security officer who was trying to lead them to safety. Additional security would not have prevented that.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Capper Al and I understand the issues involved....

Capper Al thinks that our diplomats were fools for even being there. Their fault for doing their job and not quitting and coming home.

You sure you want to align yourself with Capper Al on this one? He only seems interested in trying to goad someone into "bullying" him.

[mostpost]

Capper Al thinks that our diplomats were fools for even being there. Their fault for doing their job and not quitting and coming home.

You sure you want to align yourself with Capper Al on this one? He only seems interested in trying to goad someone into "bullying" him.
Capper Al's views are a lot closer to mine than yours are. I would not call our diplomats fools for being there, but I would say it was bad judgement going to Benghazi considering the situation there. I think Stevens felt he would be safe due to his long history in the country. Unfortunately, he was wrong.

[JustRalph]

The Benghazi SMC was attacked by dozens of armed men, many equipped with RPGs. The annex was also attacked by mortar fire.

Now that you admit this I assume you are ok with firing Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton et al for directly telling the American Public for 10 days, that the attack was a spontaneous protest turned violent due to a Youtube video? Hilary skated away to rest up for 2016. But Rice is still working. Many others. Get cracking on mailing your letters to Congress.



They both died from smoke inhalation when they became separated from the security officer who was trying to lead them to safety. Additional security would not have prevented that.

How do you rationalize this shit? A larger Security team may have precluded them fleeing at all. It may have provided completely different outcomes on several levels. Your statement is doublespeak and insulting.

[johnhannibalsmith]

Capper Al's views are a lot closer to mine than yours are. I would not call our diplomats fools for being there, but I would say it was bad judgement going to Benghazi considering the situation there. I think Stevens felt he would be safe due to his long history in the country. Unfortunately, he was wrong.

First of all, what are my views so you can make this comparison?

So what should these people have done? If the people in Benghazi are "fools", or in your gentle language, "bad judgement", for being there - what role does your President Elect Clinton play as the head of the State Department for having them there? Nothing, right? They were there on vacation and just happened to be getting paid, I suppose? If you are going to take that stance, then wouldn't that basically be the same thing as saying that the State Dept. either should have removed them or provided them with the requested assistance to mitigate such a problem?

Or just more fancy footwork here to absolve who you want to and then blame the victims that were doing what was expected? I can't wait until you tell me about how the next innocent victim of gang violence in Chicago should have used better judgement and moved to Iowa.

[PaceAdvantage]

Who disagrees that mistakes should have been avoided? Mistakes happen. That's all there is to it.Spoken like any thoughtful coke-head pothead would...(talking about Obama in case you didn't know)...

"Hey man...shit happens...light me up another blunt..."

[PaceAdvantage]

Keep it alive wackos. You are doing us on the left well.If you keep on repeating yourself like this verbatim, you run the risk of becoming spam.

[PaceAdvantage]

What world do you live in? They didn't spend a lot of money and time chasing Billy on his blow job?

Keep talking fools.Has anyone been calling you names as much as you are name calling lately.

I'd ask you to refrain from the name calling, but something tells me dealing with you rationally just might not be possible at this point. You appear to have become unhinged.

[PaceAdvantage]

Capper Al's views are a lot closer to mine than yours are. I would not call our diplomats fools for being there, but I would say it was bad judgement going to Benghazi considering the situation there. I think Stevens felt he would be safe due to his long history in the country. Unfortunately, he was wrong.His long history until Obama went and ****ed that up with his neoconish ways...meddling in another sovereign country's affairs.

[Tom]

Now that you admit this I assume you are ok with firing Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton et al for directly telling the American Public for 10 days, that the attack was a spontaneous protest turned violent due to a Youtube video? Hilary skated away to rest up for 2016. But Rice is still working. Many others. Get cracking on mailing your letters to Congress.

Of course not. Reality is whatever fits his agenda today.
Are we there yet?
Are we there yet?
:lol::lol::lol:

[mostpost]

Now that you admit this I assume you are ok with firing Susan Rice, Hillary Clinton et al for directly telling the American Public for 10 days, that the attack was a spontaneous protest turned violent due to a Youtube video? Hilary skated away to rest up for 2016. But Rice is still working. Many others. Get cracking on mailing your letters to Congress.
Susan Rice only said what the evidence indicated at the time. The indications were that a protest was taking place about the video. That did happen in several locations throughout the Arab World. The morning after the attack President Obama clearly called it an act of terror.

It really is so unimportant whether the administration originally and briefly thought the attack was only a reaction to a video. They knew very quickly that it was a planned attack. If it took them a little longer to determine the video played no part, that does not concern me.



How do you rationalize this shit? A larger Security team may have precluded them fleeing at all. It may have provided completely different outcomes on several levels. Your statement is doublespeak and insulting.
How much larger? Dozens of attackers invaded the compound-some say the number was over a hundred. They were well armed with automatic weapons and rocket propelled grenade launchers.

If you read the ARB report, which I doubt you did, you would know that the security forces were not with the ambassador at the start of the attack, though they were in or near the building he was in. But when the attack began at least two of them had to go to another building to pick up their gear.

Yeah, if there had been thirty or forty security guards the outcome would have been different, but there were not. And thirty or forty additional guards were never requested. The largest number I have seen was thirteen and that was for Libya as a whole.

[Greyfox]

Capper Al and I understand the issues involved. ..........................
This is not to say the decisions made were the correct ones. They were obviously not..

At least you got that right.
The wrong decisions were made and someone should "carry the can" for incompetence and negligence.
Those are the issues involved.

[Tom]

All you know for sure is that they never received even the 13.
You do not know if that would have made a difference.
I think you insult the ability of our people with a sorry-ass comment like that.

[PaceAdvantage]

Nobody suffers any consequences for a job done piss poor under the liberal code of honor.

That's why kids get trophies for finishing last these days...or so I'm told... :lol:

[Tom]

mostie must have a trophy room.

[johnhannibalsmith]

It really is so unimportant whether the administration originally and briefly thought the attack was only a reaction to a video. They knew very quickly that it was a planned attack. If it took them a little longer to determine the video played no part, that does not concern me.

Odds line for reasons for attack on American consulate in area saturated with Al-Qaeda on 9/11:

:1: Terrorist attack: 1-9

:2: Angry reaction to some You-tube video: 99-1

I can certainly see why of the two options, even if (I find it a big 'if') there was intelligence showing both as a possiblity, they opted for the longshot and pimped it ad-nauseum until they couldn't hold it together any longer. Much better value. In more ways than one.

No point even getting into a conversation when you can simply pretend that you would believe that cock and bull fable if it was a Republican in charge. No shot. For a week and a half I had to read gullible chowderheads swallowing this load better than a Lewinsky rip the first amendment. Hate speech gibberish - "Look what happens when people take advantage of the Constitution - there's no benefit in a video like this and it led to the deaths of four people!" It was a big deal that free speech and "islamaphobia" led to the deaths, but when it turned out that it was the 1-9 shot, the terrorists, nobody wanted to know anything or do anthing anymore. Well, except conservatives for the most part, and they got panned for wanting to know.

I can deal with the deaths. I can deal with the mistakes. I'm not and have not gotten wound up over what should have been done to save people - that's all pointless unless there is some evidence out there that they could have been saved. I haven't been convinced.

But this bullshit fairy tale about a video when everyone with a half-functioning brain knew immediately what happened and was ripped for not agreeing with the "intelligence" from the Oval Office press push... which of course was wrong... and now nobody knew anything, or we know everything, or somebody kind of knew and changed this... Get the **** out of here with that nonsense. Flaming tensions between religions or races or whatever is bad enough, but when it's just a big canned lie that they almost got away with, and would have if it weren't for those meddling cons - doing it for that reason - a disgrace in general, especially from these "transparent" non-political altruists that want to unite the world. Bunch of lying, self-serving scumbags just like the last crew. You know it and if you really don't, that's worse.

[Capper Al]

Capper Al thinks that our diplomats were fools for even being there. Their fault for doing their job and not quitting and coming home.

You sure you want to align yourself with Capper Al on this one? He only seems interested in trying to goad someone into "bullying" him.

It sounds like the only one here trying to goad someone into "bullying" is you. I never said that they were fools for being in the country. They were fools for taking a stroll on 9/11 in an Arabic war zone. You're picking at straws trying to defend yourself and your fellow wackos as you should be seeing that the premise that you propose is for idiots and followers of Faux News.

[Capper Al]

If you keep on repeating yourself like this verbatim, you run the risk of becoming spam.

I have noticed that you are not unbiased in censoring. In a dialogue in another thread between me and another one of your cronies, my stuff was censored not your cronie's. Your sidebar to this excellent handicapping forum is to support your right wing agenda. You and your cronies game plan is to just out yell and out number any view from the left. This makes the wackos here think that they won the argument or worse that they were corrrect in their thinking. Let's see if this truth doesn't get censored.

[Capper Al]

Has anyone been calling you names as much as you are name calling lately.

I'd ask you to refrain from the name calling, but something tells me dealing with you rationally just might not be possible at this point. You appear to have become unhinged.

Has anybody been more named called than Obama in this forum? Where's your rationality here?

[Capper Al]

Nobody suffers any consequences for a job done piss poor under the liberal code of honor.

That's why kids get trophies for finishing last these days...or so I'm told... :lol:

This is not name calling? :lol:

[Greyfox]

This is not name calling? :lol:

You still haven't given your head a shake.

What is name calling about that?
You're the only one on this thread doing that by labelling anyone who disagrees with you as "wackos."

PA's simply talking about the "self esteem" movement in schools where merit has gone out the window and teachers are not allowed to give zero grades anymore even when assignments are not completed and tests are failed.

In effect, a generation or more has been growing up with the idea that no one needs to be held accountable.
The example is an excellent one and Capper Al, you don't get it.

The failure for anyone to be held accountable with respect to Benghazi reflects that attitude and sets a very poor example for the nation's kids.
Fortunately, in most workplaces accountability is still a major factor in keeping one's job.

[Tom]

They were fools for taking a stroll on 9/11 in an Arabic war zone.

They were FLEEING to a safe house,not strolling.
What flavor was your Kool Aid?

[woodtoo]

Coming to an e-box near you,Guccifer the hacker has resent some of Hillorys
emails from Benghazi timeline.Waiting on msnbc .or fox.

[Robert Goren]

They were FLEEING to a safe house,not strolling.
What flavor was your Kool Aid?There are no safe houses in a war zone. Never have been and probably never will be. Drinking of any flavor of Kool Aid can change that.

[PaceAdvantage]

Has anybody been more named called than Obama in this forum? Where's your rationality here?Obama isn't a member here...just like Bush wasn't a member when the left here were calling him names nonstop...I didn't censor any of the lefties when they were calling Bush names nonstop...

You however, keep calling other members here names, IN EVERY SINGLE POST.

Name one right-leaner here who has done that....just one...

If you can't name one, and you continue to call people names in every single post...well...something will be done to stop you.

[PaceAdvantage]

This is not name calling? :lol:It is? How? Please be as specific as possible...it will be good to clear the air and show you the error of your ways.

[PaceAdvantage]

There are no safe houses in a war zone.
Thanks to Obama by the way...I know you guys continually fail to point out Obama's neoconish ways in Libya...I'll help you along...

[Capper Al]

It is? How? Please be as specific as possible...it will be good to clear the air and show you the error of your ways.

Your team does it in a passive aggressive way, "what kool aid am I drinking? ". You didn't notice?

[Capper Al]

You still haven't given your head a shake.

What is name calling about that?
You're the only one on this thread doing that by labelling anyone who disagrees with you as "wackos."

PA's simply talking about the "self esteem" movement in schools where merit has gone out the window and teachers are not allowed to give zero grades anymore even when assignments are not completed and tests are failed.

In effect, a generation or more has been growing up with the idea that no one needs to be held accountable.
The example is an excellent one and Capper Al, you don't get it.

The failure for anyone to be held accountable with respect to Benghazi reflects that attitude and sets a very poor example for the nation's kids.
Fortunately, in most workplaces accountability is still a major factor in keeping one's job.

Don't go all liberal on me now.

[Robert Goren]

Thanks to Obama by the way...I know you guys continually fail to point out Obama's neoconish ways in Libya...I'll help you along...There were no safe houses in war zones long before Obama was president. As far I can tell there never has been.
Of course Obama is a neocon. I did not know that was ever in question. Every president we have had since the turning of the 20th century (1900) has been one to some extent. The term maybe a new one( circa 1975), but the practice dates back to President Monroe, if not to Jefferson. We probably haven't had more than a half dozen presidents who were not neocons and none since Grover Cleveland. I seriously doubt a non-neocon could be elected president in the foreseeable future.

[DJofSD]

mostie must have a trophy room.
Room? Just a single room?

[Tom]

We have not had a conservative since Reagan.

[elysiantraveller]

There were no safe houses in war zones long before Obama was president. As far I can tell there never has been.
Of course Obama is a neocon. I did not know that was ever in question. Every president we have had since the turning of the 20th century (1900) has been one to some extent. The term maybe a new one( circa 1975), but the practice dates back to President Monroe, if not to Jefferson. We probably haven't had more than a half dozen presidents who were not neocons and none since Grover Cleveland. I seriously doubt a non-neocon could be elected president in the foreseeable future.

Define "neocon."

[Tom]

Define war zone.

[TJDave]

We have not had a conservative since Calvin Coolidge.

FIFY

[PaceAdvantage]

Your team does it in a passive aggressive way, "what kool aid am I drinking? ". You didn't notice?You realize you completely avoiding my very specific question.

[PaceAdvantage]

Your team does it in a passive aggressive way, "what kool aid am I drinking? ". You didn't notice?And asking one time time about kool aid doesn't even begin to compare to EVERY SINGLE REPLY ending with being called wacko...and also repeating the line about helping the liberal cause.

I get it. You're doing this just for kicks. Nobody keeps repeating the same stuff in reply after reply after reply non-stop unless they're doing it for kicks.

BTW, what makes liberals and liberal policy superior to conservatives? All those inner cities that have been run by liberals for 40-50 years? Places like Detroit?

Is it the Obama liberal policy that had turned the world in our favor from the dreaded Bush? None of our diplomats are in danger anymore in the world because of Obama....ooops...scratch that...the world still hates us, doesn't it?

You're turning a very blind eye to the fact that both parties are more similar than they are different. They all bow to the mighty dollar. Sure, they'll throw some meat towards their respective bases every now and then to fire them up and put on a good show, but when all is said and done, it doesn't matter THAT MUCH if a conservative or liberal is in the White House or sitting in Congress...that much you should have learned by now in all your years on this planet.

[Tom]

Talk about passive aggressive.
You accuse our murdered diplomats of "strolling in a war zone."
I find that extremely disrespectful and an insult to our people who gave their lives in service to this country. If this is the kind of man you are, I think you have been treated rather lightly here.

[Robert Goren]

Define "neocon."A neocon is a person who believes the USA should intervene in foreign countries either militarily or economically to produce results that represent the American Ideal or at least further American interests. Perhaps the best example of this was Reagan's invasion of Grenada or earlier in McKinley's Spanish-American War. It was a liberal idea at one time, but now has been adopted by everyone except the extremes of both political movements. The term itself came about in 1970s when some conservatives who had previously favored isolationism adopted the idea. Its use became popular during the GWB administration used it to describe certain members of his administration who pushed for the Iraqi War. The policy predates the term by a century and half. While I oppose some uses of the policy, I do not oppose it in general. The policy has nothing to do with fiscal or social conservatism and fiscal or social liberalism. Almost all liberals for instance supported the Economic boycott of South Africa to end apartheid. Liberals supported Clinton's use of troops in Bosnia. Both are good examples of neoconservatism.

[Robert Goren]

Define war zone.Chicago

[NJ Stinks]

Obama isn't a member here...just like Bush wasn't a member when the left here were calling him names nonstop...I didn't censor any of the lefties when they were calling Bush names nonstop...

You however, keep calling other members here names, IN EVERY SINGLE POST.

Name one right-leaner here who has done that....just one...

If you can't name one, and you continue to call people names in every single post...well...something will be done to stop you.



Then, in the interest of fair play, I'm sure you will be wanting to put a muzzle on the man who is the very definition of foolproof here. Or is Tom the only one allowed in the PA Witness Protection Program? :p

Tom in Post 117 of this thread:



I suppose going by the way you left-wacko-s are talking, those people getting murdered in Chicago are fools for being there when it known to be a more violent place that Libya, and anyone who dares to suggest we investigate what is going on is being political.

[PaceAdvantage]

Tom in Post 117 of this thread:Maybe I'm the one who is extra dumb today, but post 117 arrived after 116. Where do you think Tom got it from?

And did Tom keep repeating that in his next 5-10 posts?

Come on people...work with me here...it's common freakin' sense...not bias.

[elysiantraveller]

A neocon is a person who believes the USA should intervene in foreign countries either militarily or economically to produce results that represent the American Ideal or at least further American interests. Perhaps the best example of this was Reagan's invasion of Grenada or earlier in McKinley's Spanish-American War. It was a liberal idea at one time, but now has been adopted by everyone except the extremes of both political movements. The term itself came about in 1970s when some conservatives who had previously favored isolationism adopted the idea. Its use became popular during the GWB administration used it to describe certain members of his administration who pushed for the Iraqi War. The policy predates the term by a century and half. While I oppose some uses of the policy, I do not oppose it in general. The policy has nothing to do with fiscal or social conservatism and fiscal or social liberalism. Almost all liberals for instance supported the Economic boycott of South Africa to end apartheid. Liberals supported Clinton's use of troops in Bosnia. Both are good examples of neoconservatism.

This is good stuff Goren....

Now go further, where are we failing now?...

[NJ Stinks]

Maybe I'm the one who is extra dumb today, but post 117 arrived after 116. Where do you think Tom got it from?

And did Tom keep repeating that in his next 5-10 posts?

Come on people...work with me here...it's common freakin' sense...not bias.

OK. Let's take a peek at Tom's first post in this thread - Post 22:

So the deaths in Benghazi mean nothing to the left.
You guys are a disgrace to this nation, no, this species.

Common sense tells me what Tom said in this post is much nastier, personal, etc. than Al using words like fools or whackos. Am I wrong?

[PaceAdvantage]

Common sense tells me what Tom said in this post is much nastier, personal, etc. than Al using words like fools or whackos. Am I wrong?Look...all I was looking for was Al to stop REPEATING IT in EVERY SINGLE POST.

That's all.

But again, maybe I'm extra dumb, and I don't notice the righties around here repeating the SAME EXACT THING IN POST AFTER POST AFTER POST CONSECUTIVELY...

[Capper Al]

And asking one time time about kool aid doesn't even begin to compare to EVERY SINGLE REPLY ending with being called wacko...and also repeating the line about helping the liberal cause.

I get it. You're doing this just for kicks. Nobody keeps repeating the same stuff in reply after reply after reply non-stop unless they're doing it for kicks.

BTW, what makes liberals and liberal policy superior to conservatives? All those inner cities that have been run by liberals for 40-50 years? Places like Detroit?

Is it the Obama liberal policy that had turned the world in our favor from the dreaded Bush? None of our diplomats are in danger anymore in the world because of Obama....ooops...scratch that...the world still hates us, doesn't it?

You're turning a very blind eye to the fact that both parties are more similar than they are different. They all bow to the mighty dollar. Sure, they'll throw some meat towards their respective bases every now and then to fire them up and put on a good show, but when all is said and done, it doesn't matter THAT MUCH if a conservative or liberal is in the White House or sitting in Congress...that much you should have learned by now in all your years on this planet.

You can't be serious about having a rational objective dialogue going on in the political threads with your cronies? Did you read their post? The only objective post made were by mostie.

[PaceAdvantage]

The only objective post made were by mostie.Yes, of course. And I suppose you consider yourself objective after what you just posted... :bang:

[Capper Al]

Maybe I'm the one who is extra dumb today, but post 117 arrived after 116. Where do you think Tom got it from?

And did Tom keep repeating that in his next 5-10 posts?

Come on people...work with me here...it's common freakin' sense...not bias.

It's time to protect the cronies. They can dish it out and work in packs, but when the going gets rough they get protected by the boss. :cool:

[thaskalos]

Obama isn't a member here...just like Bush wasn't a member when the left here were calling him names nonstop...I didn't censor any of the lefties when they were calling Bush names nonstop...

You however, keep calling other members here names, IN EVERY SINGLE POST.

Name one right-leaner here who has done that....just one...

If you can't name one, and you continue to call people names in every single post...well...something will be done to stop you.

Does calling other members here "names" only become a problem when it's done IN EVERY SINGLE POST...or is it a problem even if it's done occasionally? It occurs to me that it should be considered a problem even if it is done occasionally...but then again, I don't make the rules.

I spend plenty of time on this section of the board, even if I don't post much...and there is no doubt in my mind about who get insulted more here, or about who does most of the insulting.

If two people here have the right to complain about getting "name called"...then these two people are Mostpost and Robert Goren...and names like "wacko" and "fool" sound like compliments compared to what I have seen aimed at those two "members".

Just sayin...

[PaceAdvantage]

You guys enjoy a board where the same exact thing gets repeated in every single reply? Really?

That's what a SIGNATURE is for...but be warned, politics and politically motivated signatures are not allowed in the horse racing section, so if you plan on posting in horse racing, you can't have a politically motivated signature.

Listen, I get it...you guys think I'm out to get you. I assure you I am not.

I have allowed plenty of vile stuff to be posted about Bush and Republicans. Don't act like I censor out negative stuff that gets posted about the right.

But, the bottom line is, if you want something repeated in every single post, make it part of your signature. That's what it's there for. That's been my point all along.

My point wasn't to censure Al for calling right wingers here wackos. My point was to stop him from repeating himself ad nauseum. I don't know how many times I watched him post the same exact thing before I spoke up...I was giving him time to see if he would cease on his own, but he enjoyed the game he was playing.

If you have something you want to repeat in every single post, make it your signature (unless you plan to post in horse racing), or cut it out.

Maybe thaskalos can start a thread which will keep a scorecard on who says what, what they say, and how many times they say it... :rolleyes:

[PaceAdvantage]

It's time to protect the cronies. They can dish it out and work in packs, but when the going gets rough they get protected by the boss. :cool:That would give your posting life here extra meaning...but unfortunately for you, I could give a rat's ass about protecting either the righties or lefties here...when I see something that bothers ME as an admin, I speak up....(special note to thaskalos...like I spoke up when Elkabong was going off on you and when people were going off on mostpost because of his former employer).

If you don't like it...well...sorry...not much I can do for you there buddy...it is what it is...

[thaskalos]

Maybe thaskalos can start a thread which will keep a scorecard on who says what, what they say, and how many times they say it... :rolleyes:

Thaskalos doesn't need a "scorecard". He can use the search engine here to look up words like low-lives, maggots, or freeloaders...and can readily prove who the guilty parties are in this "name calling" business.

And it isn't those on the left...regardless of how you try to spin it. :rolleyes:

[Capper Al]

I'm sure with all this talk about name calling that we might of forgot why these gentlemen of the right were tagged with such words as fools or wackos. Let's review:


They believe that the ambassador and his crew should be able to travel through an Arabic war zone on 9/11.
They believe that mistakes made to protect the ambassador are of national importance and are comparable to the weapons of mass destruction.

[mostpost]

Originally Posted by Capper Al
The only objective post made were by mostie.

Reply by Paceadvantage
Yes, of course. And I suppose you consider yourself objective after what you just posted...

Was there a touch of sarcasm in that "Yes, Of course?" My opinions are not objective, because-as we know-the truth has a liberal bias. However, the proofs of my opinion are always objective.

[Robert Goren]

This is good stuff Goren....

Now go further, where are we failing now?...Too much of it. We don't have the resources to be everywhere at once. We never have had and probably never will have. We have to pick our spots. IMO. Getting involved in any Islamic region is no win situation for the US right now. One side is as bad as the other when the dust clears. Obama made a mistake getting involved even in a limited way in Libya. At least he is not making the same mistake in Syria. All sides in these Islamic disputes have factions that absolutely hate the US and all we stand for. There is nothing to pick from in them. In places like Syria and Libya, we lose no matter who wins. The Arab Spring water has alkali in it. It is best not to drink any of it.

[Tom]

Maybe I'm the one who is extra dumb today, but post 117 arrived after 116. Where do you think Tom got it from?



My secret is out! :eek:

[Tom]

You can't be serious about having a rational objective dialogue going on in the political threads with your cronies? Did you read their post? The only objective post made were by mostie.

There is probably a reason you feel that way. :rolleyes:

But accusing the murdered Americans of being fools for strolling through a war zone.....you honestly think that was objective? Look in mirror and say that out loud.

[Tom]

Do you not read?
Obviously not.
Or you just enjoy lying....which is it.
For record, I did not just call you a liar. I inquired as to your motive, because it it is not clear why you insist on repeating things that are not true. We have already said they were trying to get to safe house, not strolling. We have already established that virtually every democrat believed there were WMD and agrees SH had to go.

Yet here you are, pretending to be the victim. By YOUR logivc, Iguess the WMD were just a mistake.

Grow a set, Al. Grow two, send one to Thask.

[thaskalos]

Grow a set, Al. Grow two, send one to Thask.

I am coming to Saratoga this summer, so I can compare balls with some of you gentlemen from the right...and I expect you to come in a little light by comparison.

I hope we don't miss the opportunity to meet each other...

[JustRalph]

I am coming to Saratoga this summer, so I can compare balls with some of you gentlemen from the right...and I expect you to come in a little light by comparison.

I hope we don't miss the opportunity to meet each other...

Living up to your Chicago surrounds I see :lol:

[thaskalos]

Living up to your Chicago surrounds I see :lol:
You fight fire with fire...no?

[Greyfox]

I am coming to Saratoga this summer, so I can compare balls with some of you gentlemen from the right...and I expect you to come in a little light by comparison.

I hope we don't miss the opportunity to meet each other...


Why am I reminded of High Noon and Frankie Laine?

Best luck Thask....

5sLwPziSznU

[PaceAdvantage]

I'm sure with all this talk about name calling that we might of forgot why these gentlemen of the right were tagged with such words as fools or wackos. Let's review:


They believe that the ambassador and his crew should be able to travel through an Arabic war zone on 9/11.
They believe that mistakes made to protect the ambassador are of national importance and are comparable to the weapons of mass destruction.
Nobody was "travelling" anywhere. Were they now Al?

All some are asking for are answers and accountability...it's as simple as that. Sorry and sad to see that you don't feel the same.

Good to know that with you, partisan politics trumps holding those responsible accountable for not providing adequate support to these Americans

[JustRalph]

You fight fire with fire...no?

What? You know, I have very big differences of opinion with lots of people on this board, but I have a great time at Toga with them. Some tolerate me, and vice versa. We have a great time. We aren't there to argue politics etc. I can't remember more than a few one liners about politics in the two trips I have made. Last time I took my wife with me and we had a great time with everybody. In spite of our political differences etc.

If your unable to meander thru off topic without getting upset enough to make veiled threats, you're taking it too seriously.

You will meet one hell of a diverse and great group of people via this board. Don't spoil it. It would be your loss.

[thaskalos]

What? You know, I have very big differences of opinion with lots of people on this board, but I have a great time at Toga with them. Some tolerate me, and vice versa. We have a great time. We aren't there to argue politics etc. I can't remember more than a few one liners about politics in the two trips I have made. Last time I took my wife with me and we had a great time with everybody. In spite of our political differences etc.

If your unable to meander thru off topic without getting upset enough to make veiled threats, you're taking it too seriously.

You will meet one hell of a diverse and great group of people via this board. Don't spoil it. It would be your loss.

You know what Ralph...I think you are absolutely right.

I have been taking these off-topic confrontations a little too seriously...mainly because I am not used to the flow and the tone that is often exemplified here -- most of it probably in jest.

In retrospect...there are much more important things out there to worry about -- and it is rather absurd to get into arguments with people I generally like...about things that do not seem very important at all -- now that I really think about it.

Thanks for straightening me out; I won't make the same mistake again.

[riskman]

You know what Ralph...I think you are absolutely right.

I have been taking these off-topic confrontations a little too seriously...mainly because I am not used to the flow and the tone that is often exemplified here -- most of it probably in jest.

In retrospect...there are much more important things out there to worry about -- and it is rather absurd to get into arguments with people I generally like...about things that do not seem very important at all -- now that I really think about it.

Thanks for straightening me out; I won't make the same mistake again.


thaskalos...you are a real gentlemen and a hell of a horse player.

[Capper Al]

What's the importance of Benghazi to Faux News and the right? I see two reasons. The first is that somebody might make a mistake in covering up just like Billy did. It wasn't the blow job that was illegal, it was lying under oath. We might say the UN Ambassador is the first causality here. The second is to rally the troops for the next couple of elections. There might be a chance that Hillary will run. They're loading their guns just in case.

No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi. What they care about is winning elections and not having the top 2% pay their fair share of taxes. March on to the drums of Faux News, FXXLs. (can't post it) It isn't your interest that they care about.

[Tom]

I see two reasons.

Both wrong.

[Tom]

I am coming to Saratoga this summer, so I can compare balls with some of you gentlemen from the right...and I expect you to come in a little light by comparison.

I hope we don't miss the opportunity to meet each other...

If you are going to do that, for your sake, bring the sheet music for Stormy Weather.

[Greyfox]

No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi.

What a sick pathetic attitude. I doubt that even Mostpost would back you on that.

[PaceAdvantage]

No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi.A rather remarkable display of callousness and ignorance on your part. Sadly, I expected as much from someone with your point of view...

[rastajenk]

I believe it was a lifelong Dem that said, "What difference does it make?" And she is one of the people involved. Your assertion, Al, is total crap.

[Tom]

How sad we have people who actually believe that.
Outside Dingy Harry, I can't imagine anyone saying that.

[Capper Al]

A rather remarkable display of callousness and ignorance on your part. Sadly, I expected as much from someone with your point of view...

Did you contribute any of your time or money to help the victims? I doubt it. And don't glorify yourself that posting here is caring. Talk is cheap.

[Capper Al]

Both wrong.

That's an argument.

[Capper Al]

What a sick pathetic attitude. I doubt that even Mostpost would back you on that.

How is it sick? Do you think posting positive sound bites is caring? Think about it. For if you do, you are the one with the pathetic attitude and your caring is meaningless.

[Greyfox]

How is it sick?.

If you have to ask...?:rolleyes:

[Tom]

Dig that hole a bit deeper.....we can still see some of you. :rolleyes:

[riskman]

What's the importance of Benghazi to Faux News and the right? I see two reasons. The first is that somebody might make a mistake in covering up just like Billy did. It wasn't the blow job that was illegal, it was lying under oath. We might say the UN Ambassador is the first causality here. The second is to rally the troops for the next couple of elections. There might be a chance that Hillary will run. They're loading their guns just in case.

No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi. What they care about is winning elections and not having the top 2% pay their fair share of taxes. March on to the drums of Faux News, FXXLs. (can't post it) It isn't your interest that they care about.

Of course,you are entitled to your opinion on this Benghazi matter.
As might be expected from you you believe the Right wing is in a frenzy of self-righteous indignation over the details to come out of the September 11, 2012 attack on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi What most want is an explanation as to what exactly what was known prior to, during, and immediately after the assault that left the U.S. ambassador and three other American agents dead. Ambassador Stevens had requested additional security in the weeks prior, sensing that increasing tensions in the region could put him and his team at greater risk. The administration denied Stevens’ request.

We want to know what exactly happened in Libya, not to sweep it under the rug. Americans do care what happened. We want answers now. The election is over.Obama won, Benghazi lost.

[mostpost]

I believe it was a lifelong Dem that said, "What difference does it make?" And she is one of the people involved. Your assertion, Al, is total crap.

Do you really think that Hillary Clinton's quote was a comment on the fact that four Americans died at Benghazi? It was not. It was in response to Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, who was going on and on about whether there was a protest and whether the attack arose out of that protest.
http://foxnewsinsider.com/2013/01/23/explosive-qa-clinton-asks-what-difference-does-it-make-if-benghazi-attack-happened-as-result-of-protest/

Watch the video. Secretary Clinton does not say or imply in any way that it makes no difference that four Americans are dead.

Let me say here that I do not agree with Capper Al's statement that no one cares about the four dead Americans except their friends and family-if that is what he means. Certainly friends and family are the ones most deeply affected, but I believe that many people are saddened and angered by this tragedy. I am also certain that there are many who are also using it for political gain and most of those are on your side f the political fence.

[fast4522]

"No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi."

What a load of manure from Battle Creek, MI. As Americans we can expect to know exactly what is the standard, what has always been the standard for those who safeguard our best and brightest Countrymen and women who serve abroad. Exactly what is so special about the illegitimate bastards who prowl your domain for sustenance over hero's who take an oath to serve abroad. White flight is just, and it is fitting those with your view pay more to enjoy where you live. The kitchen sink, Clinton's famous stain or whatever you have left put in there to justify your thinking.

[Capper Al]

What's sad is that we have lost touch about what it means to care. Sure I'm saddened by the deaths, but to most of us this happened in virtual reality. Posting here isn't caring, and I believe some here think so.

[Tom]

I am also certain that there are many who are also using it for political gain and most of those are on your side f the political fence.

You mean like that low-life degenerate liar Dingy Harry who tried to associate the loss of 7 military personnel this week with sequester? That kind of political gain? From the same dipstick who declared the war in Iraq was lost while we had troops in the arena? That kind political gain?

You are so far off base with your ridiculous statement.
If cold-hearted, uncaring bastards are our there trying to gain points, mostie, they are clearly democrats. There is no debate on that. You side has habitually dissed out troops, undermined our war efforts, and hated our military. Facts are facts. The only shackles on our great military is your side.

Radical muslims, communism, n korea , iran, none are the threat to us that democrats are. End of story.

[NJ Stinks]

What's the importance of Benghazi to Faux News and the right? I see two reasons. The first is that somebody might make a mistake in covering up just like Billy did. It wasn't the blow job that was illegal, it was lying under oath. We might say the UN Ambassador is the first causality here. The second is to rally the troops for the next couple of elections. There might be a chance that Hillary will run. They're loading their guns just in case.

No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi. What they care about is winning elections and not having the top 2% pay their fair share of taxes. March on to the drums of Faux News, FXXLs. (can't post it) It isn't your interest that they care about.

I think you are right about the "nobody really cares" part. Not when it happened, of course, but today definitely. Today it's all about GOP desperation. Republicans are clinging to any bit of bad news they can use and Benghazi was certainly bad news. Trouble is that it's been beat to death by Republicans over the last 6 months and there is nothing more the GOP can harvest. Unless they can find that elusive e-mail...:rolleyes:

Too bad the economy is getting stronger and the earth didn't stop spinning on its axis when taxes were raised in January. Life is just not fair for the real Americans who naturally gravitate to the GOP. :(

[mostpost]

What's sad is that we have lost touch about what it means to care. Sure I'm saddened by the deaths, but to most of us this happened in virtual reality. Posting here isn't caring, and I believe some here think so.
I think this is a good analysis. It's like people who are in love with being in love.
Also, there is a difference between finding out what went wrong and finding someone to blame. Democrats want to find out what went wrong. Republicans want to find a way to blame Obama.

[Greyfox]

Republicans want to find a way to blame Obama.

How can Repugs blame him? He didn't take the 3 a.m. call.:rolleyes:

[DJofSD]

Also, there is a difference between finding out what went wrong and finding someone to blame. Democrats want to find out what went wrong. Republicans want to find a way to blame Obama.

You have it backwards. Witness your president. Every time he sneezed in the 1st 4 years, what did we hear? It was Bush's fault.

[Tom]

I think you are right about the "nobody really cares" part. Not when it happened, of course, but today definitely. Today it's all about GOP desperation. Republicans are clinging to any bit of bad news they can use and Benghazi was certainly bad news. Trouble is that it's been beat to death by Republicans over the last 6 months and there is nothing more the GOP can harvest. Unless they can find that elusive e-mail...:rolleyes:

Reminds me of you guys and Scooter Libby. How long did your side pursue that non-story where no one got hurt? Here's the diealm stinky - Americans dies, the president outright lied about a video, as did Hillary, for weeks. We know requests for more security were denied, we know the president was Not involved for all those hours while it played out live. Asking for an investigation seems mandatory to me. We righties would be demanding it if it were a repub, and you know it. What I see here is your guys trying to change the subject because you cannot justify what happened. The truth might embarrass your boy, so you do all you can to avoid it, to demonize anyone looking to find it. Your guys are cowards. (Check mark)

[mostpost]

"No one really cares outside of the people involved and the families about what happened in Benghazi."

What a load of manure from Battle Creek, MI. As Americans we can expect to know exactly what is the standard, what has always been the standard for those who safeguard our best and brightest Countrymen and women who serve abroad. Exactly what is so special about the illegitimate bastards who prowl your domain for sustenance over hero's who take an oath to serve abroad. White flight is just, and it is fitting those with your view pay more to enjoy where you live. The kitchen sink, Clinton's famous stain or whatever you have left put in there to justify your thinking.
At last we have the answer to what happens if you set an infinite number of monkeys to typing on an infinite number of typewriters. Gibberish. If only we had taught them grammar and syntax first.

[Capper Al]

I think this is a good analysis. It's like people who are in love with being in love.
Also, there is a difference between finding out what went wrong and finding someone to blame. Democrats want to find out what went wrong. Republicans want to find a way to blame Obama.

Over the years, I've come to appreciate how well our military does a lessons learned after something goes wrong. It is a matter for them to avoid making this mistake again. They'll get to the bottom of this on their own. And unless some new information comes out, it is probably better to be dealt with out of the press.

[Capper Al]

I think this is a good analysis. It's like people who are in love with being in love.
Also, there is a difference between finding out what went wrong and finding someone to blame. Democrats want to find out what went wrong. Republicans want to find a way to blame Obama.

That is what it is all about.

[Tom]

Already out of intelligent replies?
Early today.
You had it right the other day when you said it was obviously a terror attack pretty quickly. Too bad you now ignore that when it means your boy was lying for weeks about it. Making excuses? :rolleyes:

[Capper Al]

You have it backwards. Witness your president. Every time he sneezed in the 1st 4 years, what did we hear? It was Bush's fault.


Most of it was Bush'S fault.

[Capper Al]

Already out of intelligent replies?
Early today.
You had it right the other day when you said it was obviously a terror attack pretty quickly. Too bad you now ignore that when it means your boy was lying for weeks about it. Making excuses? :rolleyes:

A rambling man, or monkey.

[mostpost]

You mean like that low-life degenerate liar Dingy Harry who tried to associate the loss of 7 military personnel this week with sequester? That kind of political gain? From the same dipstick who declared the war in Iraq was lost while we had troops in the arena? That kind political gain?
You got it wrong again. (Aside to PA. Can we get some kind of icon for "Tom is wrong again"? I get tired of typing it over and over and over.) Preceding a discussion on the sequester, Reid made some comments on the deaths of the seven marines. He never said nor implied that the sequester was to blame. After he made those comments he talked about the importance of ending the sequester in order to maintain training standards.

You are so far off base with your ridiculous statement.
When I googled "Reid blames sequester for marine deaths." I found three pages of incestuous right wing blogs mischaracterizing Reid's statement. Only ABC News reported it correctly. ANd only ABC News reported that the Marine Corps. disavowed unattributed statements supposedly coming from the Marines that were critical of Reid. All the others reported those as official. That is why my statement is not ridiculous.
If cold-hearted, uncaring bastards are our there trying to gain points, mostie, they are clearly democrats. There is no debate on that. You side has habitually dissed out troops, undermined our war efforts, and hated our military. Facts are facts. The only shackles on our great military is your side.

Radical muslims, communism, n korea , iran, none are the threat to us that democrats are. End of story.
You are definitely confused. Disagreeing with military policy is not dissing the troops. Not providing proper body armor is dissing the troops. Failing to provide for them after their service is dissing the troops. Sending them into war on the basis of intelligence you know is false is dissing the troops. End of story.

[NJ Stinks]

Reminds me of you guys and Scooter Libby. How long did your side pursue that non-story where no one got hurt? Here's the diealm stinky - Americans dies, the president outright lied about a video, as did Hillary, for weeks. We know requests for more security were denied, we know the president was Not involved for all those hours while it played out live. Asking for an investigation seems mandatory to me. We righties would be demanding it if it were a repub, and you know it. What I see here is your guys trying to change the subject because you cannot justify what happened. The truth might embarrass your boy, so you do all you can to avoid it, to demonize anyone looking to find it. Your guys are cowards. (Check mark)

Scooter Libby? His investigation was started by the CIA. Is the CIA demanding an investigation of anything to do with Benghazi? If not, why not?

[hcap]

What I see here is your guys trying to change the subject because you cannot justify what happened. The truth might embarrass your boy, so you do all you can to avoid it, to demonize anyone looking to find it. Your guys are cowards. (Check mark)

Speaking of truth embarrassing your boy? No contest.

http://assets.amuniversal.com/7bb4f1d073b601301fa2001dd8b71c47

Benghaziiiiiiiii is a pimple on a cons butt compared to Iraq.
Yet you gents so easily forget the biggest propaganda
campaign in American history that was pulled off by the
real neocons you gents all loved to glorify as heroes.
Then. Until it went all downhill.
In other words we will not speak, think of, regret,
"HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED"

Happy 10th FIASCO anniversary.

[elysiantraveller]

...

It's too bad I didn't post here back then since I was anti-war...

[Capper Al]

Speaking of truth embarrassing your boy? No contest.

http://assets.amuniversal.com/7bb4f1d073b601301fa2001dd8b71c47

Benghaziiiiiiiii is a pimple on a cons butt compared to Iraq.
Yet you gents so easily forget the biggest propaganda
campaign in American history that was pulled off by the
real neocons you gents all loved to glorify as heroes.
Then. Until it went all downhill.
In other words we will not speak, think of, regret,
"HE WHO SHALL NOT BE NAMED"

Happy 10th FIASCO anniversary.

I've named them, but the boss says we can't use their names. They are a protected species here in the forum.

[hcap]

It's too bad I didn't post here back then since I was anti-war...Funny thing here is those that were the most pro-war then are the most anti-Benghazi (Obama that is) now. GWB was a glorified cowboy then. A mix of John Wayne and Jesus Christ

[hcap]

I've named them, but the boss says we can't use their names. They are a protected species here in the forum.
Are we talking PA OT members or the pathetic members of the Bush Administration? I have not been paying to much attention to this thread and the exaggerated bogeymen propped up by the cons.

BTW, this particular conspiracy theory has no legs. It is going nowhere politically. Except maybe among CPAC and Tea Party aficionados.

[Capper Al]

Are we talking PA OT members or the pathetic members of the Bush Administration? I have not been paying to much attention to this thread and the exaggerated bogeymen propped up by the cons.

BTW, this particular conspiracy theory has no legs. It is going nowhere politically. Except maybe among CPAC and Tea Party aficionados.

The Boss is PA. The protected species are the local right wing wackos. The Tea Party is a conspiracy funded by the Koch brothers.

[hcap]

leave Jesus Christ out of your f....ng political agenda..... ass hole.Ok a mix of John Wayne and Charlton Heston

http://fineartfixer.files.wordpress.com/2010/05/charlton-moses.jpeg

[hcap]

The Boss is PA. The protected species are the local right wing wackos. The Tea Party is a conspiracy funded by the Koch brothers.The Koch Bros, with all their money shot only blanks last election.

Meanwhile the TPers are being sent out to pasture. (Maybe Ton and JR will give 'em a hand starting a REAL 3rd party)

I think Pa is protective because he suspects he and his buddies are getting creamed by the demographics, and they need all the help they can get :)

Species is an interesting choice of words. :lol: :ThmbUp:

[JustRalph]

Over the years, I've come to appreciate how well our military does a lessons learned after something goes wrong. It is a matter for them to avoid making this mistake again. They'll get to the bottom of this on their own. And unless some new information comes out, it is probably better to be dealt with out of the press.

How in Holy Hell was Benghazi a military failure?

[Tom]

When you babble on endlessly, you get a few wrong.
Al got 'em all wrong. You can tell because hcap and mostie are here ganging up on the righties here. Happens all the time. Bunch of internet bullies. Typical gang behavior.

Boo hooo hooo hooo hoooooooo, Poor us.
Forget growing a set Al, they would only stave to death and fall off.
(check mark).

[Greyfox]

Said like a true Cristian. Wants to make me go back to church.

Define: Cristian. :rolleyes:

(A stuck record keeps repeating the same over and over. Time Capper Al to flip it over and actually hear the other side.)

[Tom]

Funny thing here is those that were the most pro-war then are the most anti-Benghazi (Obama that is) now. GWB was a glorified cowboy then. A mix of John Wayne and Jesus Christ

This makes no sense at all,. It just shows you no clue what is going on here.
you are totally incapable of anything not politically motivated. Sad for you.

[Capper Al]

How in Holy Hell was Benghazi a military failure?

Okay, maybe the team effort between the state department and the military needs to be looked at. I believe they will.

[Capper Al]

When you babble on endlessly, you get a few wrong.
Al got 'em all wrong. You can tell because hcap and mostie are here ganging up on the righties here. Happens all the time. Bunch of internet bullies. Typical gang behavior.

Boo hooo hooo hooo hoooooooo, Poor us.
Forget growing a set Al, they would only stave to death and fall off.
(check mark).

Sounds like bully. Most of your post are without substance. They ramble to sound like you are making a point, but in the most of them are just name calling.

[Capper Al]

Define: Cristian. :rolleyes:

(A stuck record keeps repeating the same over and over. Time Capper Al to flip it over and actually hear the other side.)

Christian - sorry for the spelling. Did his post sound Christian like to you?

[Capper Al]

This makes no sense at all,. It just shows you no clue what is going on here.
you are totally incapable of anything not politically motivated. Sad for you.

This is one of your type of replies but from the left instead of the right.

[Capper Al]

What Faux News really means by 'fair and balanced' is demonstrated below:

Right: watergate, Iran Contra, weapons of mass destruction, war in Iran

Can't just be balanced out by Billy's blow job. So they fabricate Benghazi to balance it out.

[Tom]

Not everyone is a sheep following the flock like you are Al.
Some of us think and question things - on both sides.
You libs NEVER challenged anything.
And you have the balls to accuse us.......pathetic.

You wouldn't know fair or balanced if you tripped over it.

[hcap]

You can tell because hcap and mostie are here ganging up on the righties here. Happens all the time. Bunch of internet bullies. Typical gang behavior.Ganging up on "the righties here"??????
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Not on this thread or any other. The way it works here is the righties gang up on usually ONE leftie.

Evidently you are running of orangutanian inane babbling points.

You know ted old saying " Stay out of the kitchen if you don't wanna
overheat your banana "

[PaceAdvantage]

Did you contribute any of your time or money to help the victims? I doubt it. And don't glorify yourself that posting here is caring. Talk is cheap.At times, you seem to have remarkable difficulty with comprehending some of my posts.

The leaps in logic you make are interesting at times. You certainly have become a different person on here lately. And not for the better I might add.

Your goal these days seems simply to fight...

[PaceAdvantage]

I've named them, but the boss says we can't use their names. They are a protected species here in the forum.Seriously, I don't even know what the heck you're talking about anymore.

But I do get the distinct impression that you are taking all this way too personally. There are no shackles on you Al. Speak your mind, as you have been doing.

Just don't repeat the same damn thing in every single post you write...get it?

[PaceAdvantage]

The Boss is PA. The protected species are the local right wing wackos. The Tea Party is a conspiracy funded by the Koch brothers.I would argue the more protected species are belligerent left-leaners such as yourself...I bend over backwards to try and bring you back into the fold, but you just keep pushing the envelope the other way.

Then, when you leave me no choice and I must respond to your non-stop nonsense, you go cry how unfair I am and how I have it out for the lefties on here....

Like I said earlier, give your head a shake...it might open your eyes.