Barry names bald-faced LIAR to top post!

[JoeBlam]

And another black woman named "Rice" to boot....is Dubya sticking pins in a voodoo doll or what? Of course the name "Susan" isn't nearly as fun to play with as "Condoleezza" but it's Susan who's kinda sleezy.....told outright LIES about Benghazi for 2 weeks, has never apologized, and now has been promoted!

Kinda mannish looking same as Queen Mooch...now that Reggie is gone (or is he?) Barry seems more confused about his own gender than our national security. How many red-lines for Syria ya think they have on the drawing board in the West Wing?

 

[Osomir]

Susan Rice is highly qualified for the position. It was a good choice, I have to say I was sorry not to see her as Secretary of State. It's a shame she was tarnished by the issue of Benghazi, but she didn't really have much to do with it other than having to take talking point directions from the White House, which it was her job to do.

 

[JoeBlam]

Susan Rice is highly qualified for the position. It was a good choice, I have to say I was sorry not to see her as Secretary of State. It's a shame she was tarnished by the issue of Benghazi, but she didn't really have much to do with it other than having to take talking point directions from the White House, which it was her job to do.

So if I'm reading you correctly, it's okay with you if our national security advisor lies to the American public? Doesn't she work for us?

 

[Osomir]

Susan Rice is highly qualified for the position. It was a good choice, I have to say I was sorry not to see her as Secretary of State. It's a shame she was tarnished by the issue of Benghazi, but she didn't really have much to do with it other than having to take talking point directions from the White House, which it was her job to do.

So if I'm reading you correctly, it's okay with you if our national security advisor lies to the American public? Doesn't she work for us?

She's the US ambassador to the UN and she works for the White House. It is her job to take direction from the White House, not to use her position to promote her own opinions and ideas.

 

[JoeBlam]

Susan Rice is highly qualified for the position. It was a good choice, I have to say I was sorry not to see her as Secretary of State. It's a shame she was tarnished by the issue of Benghazi, but she didn't really have much to do with it other than having to take talking point directions from the White House, which it was her job to do.

So if I'm reading you correctly, it's okay with you if our national security advisor lies to the American public? Doesn't she work for us?

She's the US ambassador to the UN and she works for the White House. It is her job to take direction from the White House, not to use her position to promote her own opinions and ideas.

Hold up a minute....so if the White House is lying to us, Rice is exempt from being called a liar for carrying the tale to Sunday talk shows?

 

[Osomir]

Hold up a minute....so if the White House is lying to us, Rice is exempt from being called a liar for carrying the tale to Sunday talk shows?

She has quite a bit of leeway to operate under her own discretion, but she does have to stick to the central message of the administration and if the administration asks her to stick to a certain point it is absolutely her job to do so no matter her own opinion or thoughts on the subject. She is there as a representative of the US Government, not as a representative of Susan Rice's personal opinions and beliefs. She takes her talking points and positions from the White House when they are given to her, and under direction from the State Department if and when appropriate. That's her job. Just like you generally don't see press secretaries speaking out about how off the president is and inserting their own counter opinions into the mix you aren't generally going to get that in public in this case either. There is discussion behind the scenes, but ultimately, these branches take their marching orders from the White House. If she disagreed vehemently with what was being done she could tender her resignation, but she isn't authorized to change White House policy.

 

[Mr. H.]

At least I take some comfort in that the nation (and the world) now understands what Chicago politics is all about.

 

[JoeBlam]

Hold up a minute....so if the White House is lying to us, Rice is exempt from being called a liar for carrying the tale to Sunday talk shows?

She has quite a bit of leeway to operate under her own discretion, but she does have to stick to the central message of the administration and if the administration asks her to stick to a certain point it is absolutely her job to do so no matter her own opinion or thoughts on the subject. She is there as a representative of the US Government, not as a representative of Susan Rice's personal opinions and beliefs. She takes her talking points and positions from the White House when they are given to her, and under direction from the State Department if and when appropriate. That's her job. Just like you generally don't see press secretaries speaking out about how off the president is and inserting their own counter opinions into the mix you aren't generally going to get that in public in this case either. There is discussion behind the scenes, but ultimately, these branches take their marching orders from the White House. If she disagreed vehemently with what was being done she could tender her resignation, but she isn't authorized to change White House policy.

But she knew she was lying....there was no "spontaneous demonstration" over a video....it was a terrorist attack by an al-Qaida affiliate and they knew it while it was happening, did nothing to save 4 Americans from being butchered, and then knowingly lied about it to the American people to win an election. So I ask you again, what qualifies Rice to be naional security advisor when she's a known liar?

 

[Missourian]

Susan Rice is highly qualified for the position. It was a good choice, I have to say I was sorry not to see her as Secretary of State. It's a shame she was tarnished by the issue of Benghazi, but she didn't really have much to do with it other than having to take talking point directions from the White House, which it was her job to do.

So if I'm reading you correctly, it's okay with you if our national security advisor lies to the American public? Doesn't she work for us?

She's the US ambassador to the UN and she works for the White House. It is her job to take direction from the White House, not to use her position to promote her own opinions and ideas.

So you're saying the title of this thread should be "Barry, a bald faced liar, names mindless drone to top position."

 

[Gracie]

She kinda looks like Condi. Bet they are related.

 

[Sarah G]

And another black woman named "Rice" to boot....is Dubya sticking pins in a voodoo doll or what? Of course the name "Susan" isn't nearly as fun to play with as "Condoleezza" but it's Susan who's kinda sleezy.....told outright LIES about Benghazi for 2 weeks, has never apologized, and now has been promoted!

Kinda mannish looking same as Queen Mooch...now that Reggie is gone (or is he?) Barry seems more confused about his own gender than our national security. How many red-lines for Syria ya think they have on the drawing board in the West Wing?

You seem like the kind of guy who has had lots of experience being a bald face liar.

 

[JoeBlam]

So you're saying the title of this thread should be "Barry, a bald faced liar, names mindless drone to top position."

Don't call her a drone or Barry will cap you ass with one.

 

[JoeBlam]

Excellent rebuttal....find it in your butt?

 

[disskreddit]

In my experience- the best bet is to take the most extreme approach you possibly can - and then push it as hard as you possibly can. Say for example you want smaller government, and that's all you want... push hard for full blown anarchy- You'll hit your goal mid stride...

In this case, we need hearings to determine EXACTLY who has lied to us intentionally since the year 2000. For every person holding a public position who has done so, lets push as hard as we can for treason charges and go for execution by firing squad.

I wouldn't worry too much about the details... I would just look forward to the CSPAN parties I'd have at my place where all my friends and I would gather just to watch them squirm it'd be the new national pass-time.

 

[JoeBlam]

In my experience- the best bet is to take the most extreme approach you possibly can - and then push it as hard as you possibly can. Say for example you want smaller government, and that's all you want... push hard for full blown anarchy- You'll hit your goal mid stride...

In this case, we need hearings to determine EXACTLY who has lied to us intentionally since the year 2000. For every person holding a public position who has done so, lets push as hard as we can for treason charges and go for execution by firing squad.

I wouldn't worry too much about the details... I would just look forward to the CSPAN parties I'd have at my place where all my friends and I would gather just to watch them squirm it'd be the new national pass-time.

I suppose this is a veiled-reference to Dubya being a liar which is your right but you're wrong about that. The only lies that were told during his administration were the compliments he gave his tormentors who were incidentally, guilty of sedition and treason during a time of war.

 

[JoeBlam]

Looks like Osomir is content with being lied to as long as it's a "good" lie and from people he knows are liars but doesn't care. This is why these two sides can never join together to work on America's hideous conditon.....and why the calls to prepare for open rebellion are making sense to more of us.

 

[Osomir]

But she knew she was lying....there was no "spontaneous demonstration" over a video....it was a terrorist attack by an al-Qaida affiliate and they knew it while it was happening, did nothing to save 4 Americans from being butchered, and then knowingly lied about it to the American people to win an election. So I ask you again, what qualifies Rice to be naional security advisor when she's a known liar?

A couple of things here:

1.) As I have already stated she takes her talking points from the White House, if you have a problem with the talking points look at Obama. It isn't her job to contradict the White House, she doesn't really have much choice in the matter outside of resigning.

2.) She based her initial talking points on the unclassified material that stemmed from our intelligence services, she isn't authorized to divulge classified material to the public of her own free will. That's not how our classification system works.

3.) I'm not sure what you would have wanted our Ambassador to the UN to have done about the Benghazi issue? It wasn't her job to send help or to prevent it. The security issue falls on the State Department.

4.) As a side note: the Libyan branch of Ansar al-Sharia is not an Al Qaeda affiliate, it was an organization utilized by Al Qaeda affiliates to attack our consulate.

 

[Osomir]

So you're saying the title of this thread should be "Barry, a bald faced liar, names mindless drone to top position."

It was the White House that engaged in the deception, if you want to blame someone then yes blame President Bush. I don't see how you could call Ambassador Rice a drone though without simply being partisan.

The administration works by sending out one message. This applies to the entire executive. Let's take former Secretary of State Colin Powell as an example. He very much so disagreed with President Bush (no secret there) but he still utilized Bush's talking points and engaged in the course of action that Bush wanted. That was his job. The disagreements were behind the scenes and didn't really come out until after Powell decided not to stay on as Secretary of State. They are advisers, they can disagree behind the scenes, but the power rests with the president.

 

[JoeBlam]

But she knew she was lying....there was no "spontaneous demonstration" over a video....it was a terrorist attack by an al-Qaida affiliate and they knew it while it was happening, did nothing to save 4 Americans from being butchered, and then knowingly lied about it to the American people to win an election. So I ask you again, what qualifies Rice to be naional security advisor when she's a known liar?

A couple of things here:

1.) As I have already stated she takes her talking points from the White House, if you have a problem with the talking points look at Obama. It isn't her job to contradict the White House, she doesn't really have much choice in the matter outside of resigning.

2.) She based her initial talking points on the unclassified material that stemmed from our intelligence services, she isn't authorized to divulge classified material to the public of her own free will. That's not how our classification system works.

3.) I'm not sure what you would have wanted our Ambassador to the UN to have done about the Benghazi issue? It wasn't her job to send help or to prevent it. The security issue falls on the State Department.

4.) As a side note: the Libyan branch of Ansar al-Sharia is not an Al Qaeda affiliate, it was an organization utilized by Al Qaeda affiliates to attack our consulate.

You're not getting away with this mealy-mouth crap. Rice was chosen to lie on the Sunday morning shows because the rest of the kenyan's inner-circle wouldn't touch the assignment. Her work at the UN was a joke and the only reason she's around is because Moochelle likes her. Putting her in the NSA job is to enable them to claim "executive privelege" when Congress wants her to explain her lying.....no confirmation hearing required....the wall of stones grows higher.

"Unclassified material that stemmed from our intelligence services? LMAO! That's just words......you're not getting away this either. CIA resources (SFG/SEAL) were told to stand down rather than admit the annex was being overrun. There was no "unclassified" intel....it was a fairytale written by political operatives to protect candidate Obama.

Dodge on Rice preventing the attack....not worth another keystroke.

As a side note: the Libyan branch of Ansar al-Sharia is not an Al Qaeda affiliate, it was an organization utilized by Al Qaeda affiliates to attack our consulate.

A "side note" that's another goddamn lie.....Ansar al-Sharia is indeed an al-Qaida "affiliate" who took money and weapons from AQ to enable the attack. You might be able to pull your weak little word games off elsewhere but not here.

 

[bornright]

And another black woman named "Rice" to boot....is Dubya sticking pins in a voodoo doll or what? Of course the name "Susan" isn't nearly as fun to play with as "Condoleezza" but it's Susan who's kinda sleezy.....told outright LIES about Benghazi for 2 weeks, has never apologized, and now has been promoted!

Kinda mannish looking same as Queen Mooch...now that Reggie is gone (or is he?) Barry seems more confused about his own gender than our national security. How many red-lines for Syria ya think they have on the drawing board in the West Wing?

Is there anyone in this administration that did not lie about what happened in Benghazi? A point would be why would she be the only one denied? Actually she fits right with the rest of this mob.