joether
Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RacerJim
And you just don't like that some people on this board understand your agenda here, and take you to task on it. Benghazi has everything to do with "Who do you want to answer the Red phone [in the president's bedroom] at 3AM" (Hillary Clinton during the 2008 Democratic primary) -- and unlike most people on here, some of us don't want someone who has already proven they would be more concerned about furthering their own political agenda than attempting to save Americans, including an American Ambassador for crying out loud, currently being attacked. It's simply more proof that she's not qualified...just like Obama wasn't/isn't. I don't need to know what you're thinking either. Observing your posts it's all too obvious that you since can't refute the facts/truth, in typical Saul Alinsky form, you deride the character of the messenger(s) thereof....just like Obama.
Forget, in your 'version' of the United States of America, there is no 1st amendment....
We don't live in your fantasy world (Thank God!).
And as expected, yet, ANOTHER conservative couldn't muster up the courage to answer the questions I presented. That's because being 'full of shit' is typical for conservatives on this specific issue. You don't like Mrs. Clinton, so must find anything to attack her on. Regardless of how petty!
"...some of us don't want someone who has already proven they would be more concerned about furthering their own political agenda than attempting to save Americans..."
Yeah, this little gem explains the whole of the Republican/Tea Party perfectly. And you support these guys, really states 'how full of shit' your total argument is to all of us.
"...including an American Ambassador for crying out loud, currently being attacked...."
I seem to recall an undercover CIA agent that was ousted by the Bush Administration for political gain. And were was all the conservative, libertarian outrage? You could drop a pin in that room, and hear the echo from a 100 miles away!
"...Observing your posts it's all too obvious that you since can't refute the facts/truth, in typical Saul Alinsky form, you deride the character of the messenger(s) thereof....just like Obama."
Pot calling the Kettle....BLACK. I have not refuted any of the facts with Benghazi. If you had been following along, you might know that Mr. Ignorant. Yes, it was a very sad day for America, just like 4/19/95. But the length, depth, and level of 'research' and 'committees' pushed by the Republican/Tea Party on this one issue, dwarfs all the research and committees opened by Republican/Tea Party on those 13 'Benghazi-like-attacks' under former Presdient G. W. Bush. Or is it 'OK' for Americans to die in those episodes because the President was Republican?
quote:
ORIGINAL: RacerJim
FACT/TRUTH: Bad things happened on the date in question because of what Hillary Clinton did prior to the date in question -- she denied requests for more security personnel at our facilities in Benghazi despite Great Britain and the International Red Cross having removed all of their personnel from Benghazi because of the ever-increasing threat of terrorist attacks and, MOREOVER, two attacks on our facility there just a couple months prior to the date in question. What Mrs. Clinton did, both prior to and during the attack, was tantamount to "aiding and abetting the enemy" -- Treason according to the U.S. Constitution. And then she has the gall, the unmitigated gall, to scream "What difference at this point does it make?" when asked to explain why she did what she did prior to and during the attack.
Funny how 'facts' to conservative, libertarians, Republicans and Tea Party are often full of bullshit. Your telling us that Hillary Clinton should have had the ability to predict the future with perfect accuracy. If this is true, then I want you to give me the EXACT powerball jackpot winning numbers for next Friday's drawing. And you have to do it....AHEAD...of that drawing by 3 days. If you can do that, then I'll accept your....'fact'.
Because the real fact here is that this whole issue is POLITICALLY MOTIVATED, RJ. I'll accept you have an argument if you can prove to me, beyond a shadow of doubt that this isn't political motivated by conservatives, libertarians, Republicans and Tea Partiers. And you cant. That's the problem, RJ. The 'facts' and 'reality' of the history do not matter to you. Those that died, do not matter to you. How it all played out, doesn't matter to you. The whose who, doesn't matter to you. Its all about trying to undermine Hillary Clinton if she runs for President in 2016. What's wrong, RJ? Cant be intellectually honest?
|
RE: Ben Ghazi.. the scandal continues - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread