Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
State Dept. Email to White House at 6:07 PM on 9/11/12: 'Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack'
The LYING LIARS and their LYING Zombie herd.
CIA Funded assets cause wars for a Republican then a Democrat President?
Where are the "differences"?
Oh yeah, only only in the false Left/Right arguments.
For the first time in history..an American Presidential Candidate uses a foreign crisis to score political points, while it's on-going.
That sets a very dangerous precedent.
State Dept. Email to White House at 6:07 PM on 9/11/12: 'Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack'
The LYING LIARS and their LYING Zombie herd.
They lied and framed a poor filmmaker and blasted our freedom of speech.
Then apologized to all the middle east.
CIA Funded assets cause wars for a Republican then a Democrat President?
Where are the "differences"?
Oh yeah, only only in the false Left/Right arguments.
For the first time in history..an American Presidential Candidate uses a foreign crisis to score political points, while it's on-going.
That sets a very dangerous precedent.
Nonsense. Romney did what Obama can't seem to do until pushed. You seem to forget that Obama disavowed the embassy apology tweets after he figured out that they were going to make for bad press. And the bad precedent here is that Obama and company lying to the American public about what happened in order to make it look as if this was unpreventable.
State Dept. Email to White House at 6:07 PM on 9/11/12: 'Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack'
The LYING LIARS and their LYING Zombie herd.
They lied and framed a poor filmmaker and blasted our freedom of speech.
Then apologized to all the middle east.
Well..not really.
What they did was to explain that we have a different set of rules in this country. The government doesn't generate the news or films.
Which goes over many of your heads.
For the first time in history..an American Presidential Candidate uses a foreign crisis to score political points, while it's on-going.
That sets a very dangerous precedent.
Nonsense. Romney did what Obama can't seem to do until pushed. You seem to forget that Obama disavowed the embassy apology tweets after he figured out that they were going to make for bad press. And the bad precedent here is that Obama and company lying to the American public about what happened in order to make it look as if this was unpreventable.
Feel free.
Name another Presidential Candidate that did the same thing.
Nonsense. Romney did what Obama can't seem to do until pushed. You seem to forget that Obama disavowed the embassy apology tweets after he figured out that they were going to make for bad press. And the bad precedent here is that Obama and company lying to the American public about what happened in order to make it look as if this was unpreventable.
Feel free.
Name another Presidential Candidate that did the same thing.
Barack Obama
The conservative reaction from day one to this was "How can we use this against the president?". Contrast that with 9/11 when democrats looked to Bush and said "How can we help?" the partisan bickering all but ceased and he got everything he asked for with full bipartisan support. Republicans are fucking scum when it comes to how terribly conditional their support for the CIC is in times of emergency and the really shitty thing if Romney happens to win is that he too knows he can count on democrats under the same kind of situation.
For the first time in history..an American Presidential Candidate uses a foreign crisis to score political points, while it's on-going.
That sets a very dangerous precedent.
Well the major difference becomes:
Conservatives use such events to focus anger at foreign enemies when a President they approve of is in power, and focus anger at the President, when they don't like who's in power.
Liberals rally around the American President, no matter who is in power to get the enemy.
Lose what?
It's not "moral superiority"..it's about government.
You guys hate government when you aren't the guys in charge. So much so, you are doing things that make it impossible to govern.
When Bush advocated for attacking Iraq, he got a good many Democratic votes. When it was shown that the intelligence that Bush was basing his cause to attack on was not only incorrect..but cherry picked..did Bush or conservatives own up to their mistake? Nope. Quite the opposite..they shared the blame.
This is making it impossible to govern this country. Because if power is not shared..it will be taken. Simple as that.
State Dept. Email to White House at 6:07 PM on 9/11/12: 'Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack'
The LYING LIARS and their LYING Zombie herd.
What lie?
Feel free.
Name another Presidential Candidate that did the same thing.
Barack Obama
He absolutely did not.
You are very wrong about that.
On Oct. 2, 2002, Illinois state Sen. Obama spoke at an anti-war rally in Chicago and expressed his opposition to President George W. Bush’s planned invasion of Iraq.
Obama acknowledged that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was a brutal tyrant who “butchers his own people.” But referring to the planned invasion, he declared: “I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war.
“What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.”
He also said Saddam posed “no imminent threat to the United States, or to his neighbors.”
For the first time in history..an American Presidential Candidate uses a foreign crisis to score political points, while it's on-going.
That sets a very dangerous precedent.
Yeah, right, Democrats never used Iraq to score political points against Bush!
You are kidding us with this shit, right?
Flashback: Obama Doublespeak? Iraq 'Dumb War,' Libya Justified
On Oct. 2, 2002, Illinois state Sen. Obama spoke at an anti-war rally in Chicago and expressed his opposition to President George W. Bushs planned invasion of Iraq.
Obama acknowledged that Iraqs Saddam Hussein was a brutal tyrant who butchers his own people. But referring to the planned invasion, he declared: I dont oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war.
What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
He also said Saddam posed no imminent threat to the United States, or to his neighbors.
State Dept. Email to White House at 6:07 PM on 9/11/12: 'Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack'
The LYING LIARS and their LYING Zombie herd.
What lie?
Um... That one that blamed it on a video instead of Terrorists. Not terror... Terrorists.
Feel free.
Name another Presidential Candidate that did the same thing.
Barack Obama
He absolutely did not.
You are very wrong about that.
He certainly did.
Obama in 2008 Criticized Bush Foreign Policy after Afghan Attack Killed 9 Soldiers
Theyre ganging up on Mitt Romney for speaking up about the attacks in Libya and Cairo today, but in 2008 Obama criticized then President Bushs Iraq policy just after an Afghan attack left 9 Marines dead.
.As the New York Times reported, then-Candidate Obama criticized the Bush administration on July 13, 2008, arguing a new round of violence on Sunday, in which nine American soldiers died in fierce fighting with the Taliban in eastern Afghanistan, underscored the military challenges ahead for the United States.
According to the transcript of an interview on CNNs Larry King Live, Mr. Obama reiterated his talking point the next day:
You know, was it a wise thing to go in there (Iraq) and what are the costs and benefits of staying there indefinitely? Were spending $10 billion a month there. Weve spent $200 billion since the surge began. Meanwhile, the situation whereyou know, where the central front against terrorism should be taking place, in Afghanistan, the situation has deteriorated. And we had this brazen attack on a U.S. base where nine servicemen were killed.
Back then the media applauded Obama for his bravado.
* Obama in 2008 Criticized Bush Foreign Policy after Afghan Attack Killed 9 Soldiers*by*Macsmind Politics, Culture and Breaking News and the 2012 Presidential Election!