OH! I had it all wrong. According to Susan Rice Benghazi is a "false controversy".

[Yssup Rider]

LLIdiot is free to vote for whomever he feels deserves his vote.

Getting out of the closet long enough to go to the polling place is another story.

I hear they let really old people vote by mail. (That's with an "I" LLIDiot!)

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by bigtex

Oh yea, Dubya. Obama's incompetent predescessor who left 4500+ dead Americans in his wake. Proud of your 2 votes now, LexiLiar?

MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!

And you voted for Gore in 2000? Was that after you supported McCain?

And then you voted for Kerry?

Which one of them opposed military action in Iraq? BEFORE action was approved?


BigTurd, you have a difficult situation, and I understand it, because I have had one also. It's called have a choice between 2 doors.

But unlike you, I don't make my decision on Monday morning.

I make it at the time it was made based on the best information available.

Unfortunately, for those 4,500 people (actually there were more than that) who died in Iraq after the invasion, you neglected to call the President of the United States and share with him your superior knowledge of the realities on the ground and in the ground in Iraq. You are at fault for not stepping up to the plate and prevent the POTUS to make such a tremendous blunder .... the same one made by Clinton-Gore, Kerry, Hillarious, and roughly 95% of the "free world" and most of the Middle Eastern countries. You could have saved with the world with your SUPERIIOR INTELECTUAL CAPACITY AND XRAY VISION INTO THE FUTURE.

BigTurd, you should be ashamed for not stepping up to the plate and allowing all those people to die.

Now that you have recognized your mistake, why can't you accept the FACT that you man IN OFFICE NOW has lied to the U.S. voters and is still lying to the U.S. voters about his intentional fraud on the U.S. voters in order to get re-elected in 2012. Rather than trying to refocus the discussion on some other lame-ass issue that was created by YOUR FAIILURE TO DISCLOSE SPECIAL INFORMATION YOU HAD AND 95-99% OF THE REST OF THE WORLD DIDN'T HAVE, WHICH INCLUDED THE POTUS.

Otherwise, have a wonderful year ahead being ashamed of your vote in 2008 and 2012 for the Fraud in Office Now.

[mikeylikesit69]

No I'm not. Seriously, why are we still talking about this. I mean the whole complaint was whether Obama called it a terrorist attack or demonstration. As Hillary said, "what difference does it make". He could have claimed it was proof of aliens landing or of the spinx coming back and it wouldn't change the facts.
If you want to bash people for the attack and what could have been done to prevent it, then it is a legit discussion. Most complaints have been who said what, where, and when and that really has no bearing on the issue. No real discussion about the actual facts and how it could have been prevented or increasing security.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by mikeylikesit69

If you want to bash people for the attack and what could have been done to prevent it, then it is a legit discussion. Most complaints have been who said what, where, and when and that really has no bearing on the issue. No real discussion about the actual facts and how it could have been prevented or increasing security.

First, until there is agreement on "who" and "why" our people were attacked, it is IMPOSSIBLE to discuss how it could have been "prevented" or if "increasing security" would help in the future. Because ...

as long as "the film" is to blame the "solution" is simple ... ban all "inciteful" films.

And that is what the administration attempted to do .....

........... by searching for and arresting the film maker. Once the administration admits they were lying about what was the "cause" of the attack then "prevention" can be discussed.

Just like once the administration quits lying about the ACA then a solution can be found. Signing people up for nothing is no "solution."

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by mikeylikesit69

No I'm not. Seriously, why are we still talking about this. I mean the whole complaint was whether Obama called it a terrorist attack or demonstration. As Hillary said, "what difference does it make". He could have claimed it was proof of aliens landing or of the spinx coming back and it wouldn't change the facts.
If you want to bash people for the attack and what could have been done to prevent it, then it is a legit discussion. Most complaints have been who said what, where, and when and that really has no bearing on the issue. No real discussion about the actual facts and how it could have been prevented or increasing security.

The fact is that Odumbo and Hildabeast colluded and lied in order to obscure who should be held accountable for what happened at Benghazi. They lied their collective asses off in order to win elections: 2012 and 2016. Odumbo is responsible in that his foreign policy of appeasing Islamic extremists left Stevens without sufficient security in Benghazi; hence, vulnerable to attack. Hildabeast is directly responsible for ordering Stevens to Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 without adequate protection. This matter goes to the heart of trustworthy leadership. As CC remarked above, if Hildabeast plans to run in 2016, this Benghazi issue will justifiably stay in the forefront of issues discussed. It is but one of the millstones around her neck that will drag her down.

[gnadfly]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Let me answer for BigKotex: Yes.

LL is a Democrat. BigKotex is a yellow dog Democrat. Big Difference.

Originally Posted by bigtex

BTW, since you know for a fact that "LL is a Democrat," who was the last "Democrat" that LL supported for President?

Hmmm, I wonder if it was Strom Thurmond!

Interesting that BigKotex huffed and puffed but didn't deny he was a yellow dog Democrat. I guess that's because he is and proud of it! So why the anger? I didn't know Strom Thurmond ran for President but I'm not nearly as crusty as an Old BigKotex. Was that before or after George Wallace ran?

Originally Posted by mikeylikesit69

No I'm not. Seriously, why are we still talking about this. I mean the whole complaint was whether Obama called it a terrorist attack or demonstration. As Hillary said, "what difference does it make". He could have claimed it was proof of aliens landing or of the spinx coming back and it wouldn't change the facts.
If you want to bash people for the attack and what could have been done to prevent it, then it is a legit discussion. Most complaints have been who said what, where, and when and that really has no bearing on the issue. No real discussion about the actual facts and how it could have been prevented or increasing security.

Because Obama, Hillary and Susan Rice threw the First Amendment under the bus to promote their narrative, that's why. BTW, you haven't been paying attention. Just blissfully ignorant and intolerant of those who aren't?

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by gnadfly

Because Obama, Hillary and Susan Rice threw the First Amendment under the bus to promote their narrative, that's why

+1

That too!

[FU_CC]

[QUOTE=I B Hankering;1054755540][SIZE="4"]

[JD Barleycorn]

We now know that Timmie thinks Benghazi was something (though he is not saying what). I call that progress.

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

The fact is that Odumbo and Hildabeast colluded and lied in order to obscure who should be held accountable for what happened at Benghazi. They lied their collective asses off in order to win elections: 2012 and 2016. Odumbo is responsible in that his foreign policy of appeasing Islamic extremists left Stevens without sufficient security in Benghazi; hence, vulnerable to attack. Hildabeast is directly responsible for ordering Stevens to Benghazi on the anniversary of 9/11 without adequate protection. This matter goes to the heart of trustworthy leadership. As CC remarked above, if Hildabeast plans to run in 2016, this Benghazi issue will justifiably stay in the forefront of issues discussed. It is but one of the millstones around her neck that will drag her down.

This is the opinion of a guy who smears himself with his own shit. No fact. No reference. Just ranting.

How can you tell? It begins with "The fact is..." Classic IBIdiot arrogant lie post.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

This is the opinion of a guy who smears himself with his own shit. No fact. No reference. Just ranting.

How can you tell? It begins with "The fact is..." Classic IBIdiot arrogant lie post.

Fact remains, that the above unintelligent diatribe by you, you racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM, better describes your ignorant posts.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

As CC remarked above, if Hildabeast plans to run in 2016, this Benghazi issue will justifiably stay in the forefront of issues discussed. It is but one of the millstones around her neck that will drag her down.

If it did not drag Obama down in 2012, I'm not sure what makes you guys think it will drag Hildabeast down in 2016. Folks had already moved on from that storyline in Nov 2012. Hilliary's problem will be her age, same with Biden's and even Kerry if he runs. The Dem's seem to have no up and comers. The GOP has Walker and teamed with the NM Gov would make a tough team to beat. The GOP's problem is their primary. If you elect nuts that scream about Benghazi instead of a current 2016 event, they will lose. The GOP base is pushing the party to far right for the indy's to vote for. The fact of the matter is that if the Dem's do not get healthcare fixed, they are in a heap of trouble , unless you boys keep pushing this Benghazi shit.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

If it did not drag Obama down in 2012, By election time he and the others were still lying about it .... and folks who "wanted to believe him" continued to do so ... besides many of them didn't want to be called a racist by voting against him.

I'm not sure what makes you guys think it will drag Hildabeast down in 2016. See above. In an of itself it probably won't, but ... there is so much more. Her strongest suit is her official gender .. so many people want there to be a female President .... might as well have her?


Folks had already moved on from that storyline in Nov 2012. Obviously not ALL "FOLKS" .. see above. Hillarious took the "sword" and swallowed it .... the only deep throat she can do. She's damaged goods.

Race and gender are not remarkable qualifications for anything, and shouldn't be. Unfortunately not everyone believes in "equality."

[WTF]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

Race and gender are not remarkable qualifications for anything, and shouldn't be. Unfortunately not everyone believes in "equality."

Everybody believes in equality for their race or gender!

My point was rather you like it or not...Benghazi will not be an issue in 2016. If it is, if that is the best the GOP can throw up against Hillary , they will lose. If the GOP elects someone that far to the right, the Indy voters will be turned off. If they have to try and play the Benghazi card, it is because they are going to lose. The GOP candidate in the general election will not bring tis to the forefront.

It is an issue that resonates with a small vocal segment of voters. Not enough to get one elected President.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by WTF

Everybody believes in equality for their race or gender!

My point was rather you like it or not...Benghazi will not be an issue in 2016. If it is, if that is the best the GOP can throw up against Hillary , they will lose. If the GOP elects someone that far to the right, the Indy voters will be turned off. If they have to try and play the Benghazi card, it is because they are going to lose. The GOP candidate in the general election will not bring tis to the forefront.

It is an issue that resonates with a small vocal segment of voters. Not enough to get one elected President.

And Zimmerman will be found guilty.