Eric Cantor: Lie much?

Let's see. I'm the president of the U.S., post 9/11. We have scores of intelligence folks here and around the world looking for bin Laden and others. What kind of comments from me are likely to to help the process? Should I talk about how we're combing through all sorts of leads, documents, interviewing, searching, etc., etc., diligently 24/7 and won't rest until we've got him or killed him? Or, rather than saying things that might keep him and others constantly on their toes and vigilant, I just say things that make it sound like our interests lie elsewhere?

Yeah, I know the kinds of things I'd be saying. Also know what some dipshits in here would be blabbing instead.

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh....so Bush's comments were all part of his strategery. I get it!:cuckoo:

Cali Girl is right, what did you expect Bush to say? That he thinks about Bin Laden every day?

Are we supposed to believe that Obama did? He wasn't doing shit until the intell obtained during the Bush years came to fruition and the military laid a plan out on his desk.

And then, Obama summoned a whole lot of "courage" in OKing the plan. Of course if Bin Laden was out getting coffee or the choppers got shot down Obama wouldn't be the one taken hostage or killed, those soldiers would had been, but hey, that took a lot of "courage" on Obama's part. :cool:

PLEASE tell me you are smart enough to see the difference between:

"That he thinks about Bin Laden every day?"

and


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)
 
Cantor's right. If y'all wanna blame Bush for the bad stuff, you have to face the unpleasant truth that this current success started under Bush's watch.

Sharing credit does not make it any less significant. Man up, lefties.

That only works if you accept that Bush WAS to blame for the 'bad stuff'.

When did the Right show any inclination to do that?

Starting with the unmitigated disaster of the Iraq war and the needless deaths and injuries to thousands of Americans, and the waste of trillions of dollars.

Is the Right's consensus now to willingly blame Bush, unequivocally, for that?

Of course not, he had the backing of a majority of Congress to invade Iraq, the thrust of which started under Clinton. The left had been calling for regime change in Iraq since the late nineties. Bush just did it, but with full Congressional approval.. like TWICE.

They all own it. Try being honest with yourself... it's refreshing.
 
Bush OUTRIGHT proclaimed...

"It's not that important."

"It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."


And you have DUMB, PARTISAN, RADICAL hacks like CaliGurl talking about "nuances."

What a lying POS!!!


*SMH*
 
I've come to believe that the leftist partisan hacks won't be truly happy until we erect a statue of 0bama in the center of Washington DC...

Fuck all partisan hacks... Every one...
 
Anyway.. what does the invasion of Iraq have to do with the murder of Bin Laden?

Deflect much?
 
Bush OUTRIGHT proclaimed...

"It's not that important."

"It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."


And you have DUMB, PARTISAN, RADICAL hacks like CaliGurl talking about "nuances."

What a lying POS!!!


*SMH*

:lol::lol::lol::lol::lol:

Dude... I think you shat yourself.
 
Cantor's right. If y'all wanna blame Bush for the bad stuff, you have to face the unpleasant truth that this current success started under Bush's watch.

Sharing credit does not make it any less significant. Man up, lefties.

The truth be told it started under Bill Clinton. I would never expect CG to man up, whatever that's suppose to mean.
 
This lame attempt at spin by the Right is comparable to the morons who claim that the economic boom during the Clinton years was caused by Ronald Reagan.

So...

...the Right's spins are as follows:

Obama inherited Bush's great work in pursuing Bin Laden, but did he inherit an economic disaster from Bush?

No no no no, can't say that!! Economic disaster bad!!! Can't blame Bush for that!!

lol, maybe the economy fell apart on Bush because he was too focused on the trail of Bin Laden!!!!!!!!

jeezus you people are stupid!
 
I wonder if Obama has called Bush and thanked him for all the revamping that Bush instigated that allowed the CIA and the Seals to get Bin Laden?

Probably not.
 
Bush OUTRIGHT proclaimed...

"It's not that important."

"It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."


And you have DUMB, PARTISAN, RADICAL hacks like CaliGurl talking about "nuances."

What a lying POS!!!


*SMH*

Contrast this with what Obama said at the BEGINNING of his Presidency...

"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.”

But somehow, we have to thank Bush who SHIRKED the responsibility, not to mention the fact that it happened under HIS watch in the first damn place.

But Obama did nothing, we are to thank the military soldiers and only the military soldiers...as if we have soldiers out there on their own making up their own commands, actions and missions as they go along.

Radical Right Wingers really aren't worth the air they breathe.
 
I wonder if Obama has called Bush and thanked him for all the revamping that Bush instigated that allowed the CIA and the Seals to get Bin Laden?

Probably not.

Obama would do better to "thank" Bush for allowing the GREATEST and WORST attack on American soil to occur under his slumbering watch.
 
Anyway.. what does the invasion of Iraq have to do with the murder of Bin Laden?

Deflect much?

It has NOTHING to do with it, because Bush took his off of the ball (Bin Laden), by starting an invasion of Iraq. Get it?

No.. this is colossally goofy, even for you. So, your argument is that we needed all the resources used in Iraq to get Bin Laden? REALLY????

Come on man....

:lol:
 
Bush OUTRIGHT proclaimed...

"It's not that important."

"It's not our priority."

"I am truly not that concerned about him."


And you have DUMB, PARTISAN, RADICAL hacks like CaliGurl talking about "nuances."

What a lying POS!!!


*SMH*

You really are clueless, aren't you? Again, would you have preferred him to say that chasing Osama was our biggest priority? And give Osama that kudos to his terrorist followers? Or was Bush supposed to say 'I worry constantly about Bin Laden'? And give Osama yet more kudos to his terrorist followers?

Learn what the word 'nuance' means. I can't even call you a half wit... you're not that smart.

Hells teeth, you are almost rdean dumb.
 
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhh....so Bush's comments were all part of his strategery. I get it!:cuckoo:

Cali Girl is right, what did you expect Bush to say? That he thinks about Bin Laden every day?

Are we supposed to believe that Obama did? He wasn't doing shit until the intell obtained during the Bush years came to fruition and the military laid a plan out on his desk.

And then, Obama summoned a whole lot of "courage" in OKing the plan. Of course if Bin Laden was out getting coffee or the choppers got shot down Obama wouldn't be the one taken hostage or killed, those soldiers would had been, but hey, that took a lot of "courage" on Obama's part. :cool:

PLEASE tell me you are smart enough to see the difference between:

"That he thinks about Bin Laden every day?"

and


"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."
- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02

"I am truly not that concerned about him."
- G.W. Bush, repsonding to a question about bin Laden's whereabouts,
3/13/02 (The New American, 4/8/02)

Again, two comments taken out of context don't make a difference to me or most Americans. I'm sure you can find plenty of quotes by Bush on wanting to hunt down and kill him or bring him to justice, but I realize that doesn't fit your agenda.

Kerry tried to use this lame arguement against Bush in the Presidential race. It was a laughable issue to suggest Bush didn't want to catch or kill Bin Laden then, and still is today. How'd that 2004 election go by the way?
 
Not saying that the Dems don't do it (I can't remember one recently), but it's been funny to watch the Republicans play damage control on a whole bunch of issues lately. The attempt to pivot and spin is almost dizzying for people who didn't pay attention.

Coulter trying to make out like the Birther shit wasn't mainstream (when it's 62% of the country who previously thought that Obama wasn't born in the US)...and that they were against it the whole time.

Now this "let me slip in here under the radar that Bush was the leader in this victory" crap.

It's pretty bush-league stuff. In both senses of the word.
 
You really are clueless, aren't you? Again, would you have preferred him to say that chasing Osama was our biggest priority? And give Osama that kudos to his terrorist followers? Or was Bush supposed to say 'I worry constantly about Bin Laden'? And give Osama yet more kudos to his terrorist followers?

Learn what the word 'nuance' means. I can't even call you a half wit... you're not that smart.

Hells teeth, you are almost rdean dumb.

WAAAAAAAHHHHH...you are besmirtching my Pwezidunt!

gop_cry1.jpg


LoL @ "What do you want him to say?"

DumbA$$...I expected the buffoon to LEAD.

I expected him to say...

"We will kill bin Laden. We will crush al-Qaida. That has to be our biggest national security priority.”

THAT'S what $hrub SHOULD have said.
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top