3,000+ Were Killed On 9-11-2001

[GWV5903]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

Check this one out..

Hi, you have received -386 reputation points from GHook93.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
You are such a dumb n!gger!
Regards,
GHook93

Note: This is an automated message.

What do you expect, you play the race card so often...

People get tired of your crap, you can't rebuttal much of anything, your hatred of the white race is evident, grow up or shut up...

 

[MarcATL]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

Check this one out..

Hi, you have received -386 reputation points from GHook93.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
You are such a dumb n!gger!
Regards,
GHook93

Note: This is an automated message.

What do you expect, you play the race card so often...

People get tired of your crap, you can't rebuttal much of anything, your hatred of the white race is evident, grow up or shut up...

So you're totally cool w/racial epitaphs then. Got it.

Also, don't think that the fact that you're from TEXX-A$$ isn't noted.

 

[GWV5903]

Check this one out..

What do you expect, you play the race card so often...

People get tired of your crap, you can't rebuttal much of anything, your hatred of the white race is evident, grow up or shut up...

So you're totally cool w/racial epitaphs then. Got it.

When you grow up, maybe then you will realize life is a struggle for everyone...

 

[jillian]

Kerry on troofer......

I didn't see him say that bush purposely caused 9-11.

Are all of the idiots desperately ranting about this president and Benghazi troofers?

I look forward to seeing even a single post where you have called them 'troofers'

 

[LA RAM FAN]

Holy fuck!

Still talking about Bush?

This election is not about Bush!

With Romney about to go RIGHT BACK to Bush's insane policies and DOUBLE-DOWN on them...?

Yes. it. is.

Please explain why you think he is going back to Bush's policies.

uh could be because he is long time good friends with him.



Holy fuck!

Still talking about Bush?

Considering Obama is participating in the 9/11 coverup and has expanded Bushs war crimes thats something that he actually should have mentioned as well.

 

[Warrior102]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

How many dead Americans have you Libberhoid buttfuckers "let slide" since Commander In Chump was sworn in?

Irrelevant

Out the fucking door in five days

 

[LA RAM FAN]

George Bush 2OO1 speech revisited - YouTube

Like clockwork,it went ignored again Eots.But what else do you expect from the official conspiracy theory apologists?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

Please go fuck yourself and drop dead and not necessarily in that order.

Thank you

 

[Rat in the Hat]

George Bush 2OO1 speech revisited - YouTube

Like clockwork,it went ignored again Eots.But what else do you expect from the official conspiracy theory apologists?

Hey imbecile, make another post about farts and poop.

It's all you're good for since you drank the Gage Kool-Aid.

 

[California Girl]

It takes a special level of sick to keep gloating about the dead of 9-11. Marc is, clearly, more interested in his sick 'points' than murdered Americans.

What a freak.

 

[MarcATL]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

This bastard got hurt by my post...

Hi, you have received -2536 reputation points from California Girl.
Reputation was given for this post.

Comment:
.

Regards,
California Girl

Note: This is an automated message.

Truth hurts huh? Ya stinkin' Bush supporter ya!!

 

[emilynghiem]

Holy fuck!

Still talking about Bush?

This election is not about Bush!

Karmically, yes, this could be about Bush.
If we got 8 years of Bush despite half the country protesting constantly,
we could get 8 years of Obama while the other half yells.

God will give us the govt we deserve and require for our spiritual growth.

If we can't forgive each other and work together,
we may just take turns yelling and screaming back and forth,
and taking turns suffering while blaming the other party.

If we can learn to rise above and use our differences for good purpose,
maybe we can learn to share power, resources, and CREDIT in solving problems together, and quit wasting billions of dollars projecting blame back and forth in the media.

 

[MarcATL]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

Please go fuck yourself and drop dead and not necessarily in that order.

Thank you

Mmm, mmmm, mmmm!!! Radical RW rage sure is tasty!

Yum!!!!

 

[emilynghiem]

I'm not letting you get away with that tripe as it if were true.

• Obama doesn't believe in gutting the military, or it would have been done already.
• Leading from behind is fine, it's still leadership.
• "Class warfare" is just a name Republicans made up to combat issues they know they lose on.
• "Job Creators" is just a name Republicans made up to make the rich seem good/noble/saintly...it's nonsense. Furthermore, Obama does not vilify them.
• Obama doesn't act like capitalism is a sin, he acts like greed is a sin...and it is a sin.

Now you may pick up yourself and go.

Dear M: how do any of these above opinions or values translate into
Constitutional enforcement in govt to serve and protect the nation's interests?

Examples:
1. leading from the "top down" ie mandating from federal govt NEGATES the concept of democratic governance by the people and states, where policies of govt REFLECT the will of the people and don't DICTATE it

2. regarding responsible use of capitalism, this depends on CONSTITUTIONAL enforcement. The same way the rich don't want the poor abusing govt for handouts without responsibility, nor do the poor or middle class want huge corporations abusing resources to enjoy unequal and unchecked influence and profits at the expense of individual citizens. The solution is to enforce Constitutional due process and representation so NO power is abused either way!

Last time I checked, the Republicans and Tea Party were more concerned with Constitutional enforcements. When I bring up this issue it is the Constitutionalists who put govt responsibility above partisan agenda to take care of this or that through elected govt.

So if Obama/Democrats and Romney/Republicans would stick to Constitutional decisions that reflect the combined interests of all parties, then we wouldn't have these arguments.

We would have free enterprise rewarded but without abuse by greed to exploit the system.

We would have Democrats and liberals paying for their own social programs without depending on voting in leaders to use govt for these things.

In general if Obama supporters and more Democrats like me fund our own programs and build these democratically where they don't impose on people who want to fund their own, then we wouldn't HAVE these arguments over "class war" and whether which party is pushing the interests of the rich or the poor over the others. We would agree to set up programs that accommodate ALL levels, WITHOUT imposition or conflict. That is what we need, CONSTITUTIONAL policies that include all interests and views EQUALLY.

I believe Romney is more centrist and moderate and able to accommodate a broader range of the population, while Obama is not able to include the people his is alienating.

I support my fellow Democrat party members in fixing the problems of our constituents ourselves, by working locally, and not trying to elect leaders to impose things from the top down; we need to build a stable sustainable foundation from the ground up, in partnership with Republicans who have a strong sense of Constitutional enforcement, and Greens who work on sustainable solutions and inclusion while avoiding the political division and games.

Romney is the stronger Constitutionalist, Obama and the Democrats are better for grassroots leadership needed to build locally across our states and cities through coalitions to run program without relying on govt. I voted Green because I am in Texas, where the state goes conservative anyway, and I can use my vote to promote Green policies of checking corporations, independent currency, proportional representation, and conflict resolution.

My values may align more with Greens and Democrats, but that leadership style works better locally and is more needed there to organize and empower minorities to govern programs independently. The election for President is about what the federal govt needs to serve America, which is to be checked and limited by the Constitution, and redirect authority to the States to localize govt and programs with more direct accountability that way.

If you vote by the Constitution, Romney clearly answers to that more than Obama whose ability and authority to implement social agenda depends on relations/coalition building among his support base. That is true his best talents for leadership and change are there, but those needs to be applied locally and not mandated from Washington where you can't reach the people. Because the President must focus full time on national security, foreign and military direction, Obama can't do that and dedicate full attention to the social programs that voters for the Democrat Party want to be taken care of. Obama is a good leader in that aspect, but his constituents need him LOCALLY, so I support Democrats on creating programs on that level and reducing the overreliance on govt to dictate these which is backwards.

It may seem ironic that in order to vote for the values of Democrats like Obama, the leadership positions must be locally focused.
So you would end up voting against Obama to shift his leadership to the areas where he can actually fulfill these goals. I still believe he would make a better VICE PRESIDENT where he could organize coalition based programs through the Senate, and leave the military/security issues to a Republican President to handle full time. Sort of like an internal and external Vice President. If Obama and Romney both claim to be able to work across party lines, they could have run on the same ticket and saved all that campaign money to invest in the corrections and programs they envision for the govt and economy.

 

[tjvh]

And the Republicans let the then president slide...

Yet they are TRYING so hard to make a much less significant incident seem much worse than took place in Libya on 9-11-2012

9/11/2001 was mis handled
9/11/2001 was covered up
lies were told about 9/11/2001
apologies made about 9/11/2001 (well, not really, as Republicans are never sorry for their actions, only for being caught)

Now they are lying, and lying and lying as if it's going out of style trying to get good people in trouble where no wrong doing has been done

MarcATL... Nuttier than a Peanut Butter pie with Almonds on top.

 

[Rozman]

Someone is trying to pass of opinions as facts again.

No..that's basically what happened.

The 9/11 commission took over a year to convene..and the major players, Bush and Cheney, testified in secret.

The final report was redacted and pretty weak.

It also, amazingly, (well not really), put blame on Clinton even though he was out of office for 8 months.

4 years later Obama is still blaming Bush...

 

[Si modo]

Boooooosh!

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Kerry on troofer......

I didn't see him say that bush purposely caused 9-11.

Are all of the idiots desperately ranting about this president and Benghazi troofers?

I look forward to seeing even a single post where you have called them 'troofers'

Are you so stupid that you don't know Truther encompasses people who have believe the government lied, not just people that think Bush planted explosives? is your racist reflex to defend blacks so sensitive that you can't even criticize them when they are saying things that are facially impossible?

 

[MarcATL]

I'm not letting you get away with that tripe as it if were true.

• Obama doesn't believe in gutting the military, or it would have been done already.
• Leading from behind is fine, it's still leadership.
• "Class warfare" is just a name Republicans made up to combat issues they know they lose on.
• "Job Creators" is just a name Republicans made up to make the rich seem good/noble/saintly...it's nonsense. Furthermore, Obama does not vilify them.
• Obama doesn't act like capitalism is a sin, he acts like greed is a sin...and it is a sin.

Now you may pick up yourself and go.

Dear M: how do any of these above opinions or values translate into
Constitutional enforcement in govt to serve and protect the nation's interests?

Examples:
1. leading from the "top down" ie mandating from federal govt NEGATES the concept of democratic governance by the people and states, where policies of govt REFLECT the will of the people and don't DICTATE it

2. regarding responsible use of capitalism, this depends on CONSTITUTIONAL enforcement. The same way the rich don't want the poor abusing govt for handouts without responsibility, nor do the poor or middle class want huge corporations abusing resources to enjoy unequal and unchecked influence and profits at the expense of individual citizens. The solution is to enforce Constitutional due process and representation so NO power is abused either way!

Last time I checked, the Republicans and Tea Party were more concerned with Constitutional enforcements. When I bring up this issue it is the Constitutionalists who put govt responsibility above partisan agenda to take care of this or that through elected govt.

So if Obama/Democrats and Romney/Republicans would stick to Constitutional decisions that reflect the combined interests of all parties, then we wouldn't have these arguments.

We would have free enterprise rewarded but without abuse by greed to exploit the system.

We would have Democrats and liberals paying for their own social programs without depending on voting in leaders to use govt for these things.

In general if Obama supporters and more Democrats like me fund our own programs and build these democratically where they don't impose on people who want to fund their own, then we wouldn't HAVE these arguments over "class war" and whether which party is pushing the interests of the rich or the poor over the others. We would agree to set up programs that accommodate ALL levels, WITHOUT imposition or conflict. That is what we need, CONSTITUTIONAL policies that include all interests and views EQUALLY.

I believe Romney is more centrist and moderate and able to accommodate a broader range of the population, while Obama is not able to include the people his is alienating.

I support my fellow Democrat party members in fixing the problems of our constituents ourselves, by working locally, and not trying to elect leaders to impose things from the top down; we need to build a stable sustainable foundation from the ground up, in partnership with Republicans who have a strong sense of Constitutional enforcement, and Greens who work on sustainable solutions and inclusion while avoiding the political division and games.

Romney is the stronger Constitutionalist, Obama and the Democrats are better for grassroots leadership needed to build locally across our states and cities through coalitions to run program without relying on govt. I voted Green because I am in Texas, where the state goes conservative anyway, and I can use my vote to promote Green policies of checking corporations, independent currency, proportional representation, and conflict resolution.

My values may align more with Greens and Democrats, but that leadership style works better locally and is more needed there to organize and empower minorities to govern programs independently. The election for President is about what the federal govt needs to serve America, which is to be checked and limited by the Constitution, and redirect authority to the States to localize govt and programs with more direct accountability that way.

If you vote by the Constitution, Romney clearly answers to that more than Obama whose ability and authority to implement social agenda depends on relations/coalition building among his support base. That is true his best talents for leadership and change are there, but those needs to be applied locally and not mandated from Washington where you can't reach the people. Because the President must focus full time on national security, foreign and military direction, Obama can't do that and dedicate full attention to the social programs that voters for the Democrat Party want to be taken care of. Obama is a good leader in that aspect, but his constituents need him LOCALLY, so I support Democrats on creating programs on that level and reducing the overreliance on govt to dictate these which is backwards.

It may seem ironic that in order to vote for the values of Democrats like Obama, the leadership positions must be locally focused.
So you would end up voting against Obama to shift his leadership to the areas where he can actually fulfill these goals. I still believe he would make a better VICE PRESIDENT where he could organize coalition based programs through the Senate, and leave the military/security issues to a Republican President to handle full time. Sort of like an internal and external Vice President. If Obama and Romney both claim to be able to work across party lines, they could have run on the same ticket and saved all that campaign money to invest in the corrections and programs they envision for the govt and economy.

Interesting read, however I disagree w/you on your approach to Obama.

A President deals with the hand given him. In your very statement you state or imply that a REpublican in his place would have made things worse.

Obama has done a very good job.

P.S. - Please check Romney's record before you go predicting how good and bi-partisan a job he would do as POTUS. As Governor of MA he was not bi-partisan. His record in MA blows chunks, hence his one term. The only, and I mean ONLY thing he has going for him is Romney Care, which the radical Republicans hate his guts for. Democrats like you are why our party is weak. Republicans stick together no matter what, they are wrong and strong, but they stick together...unfortunately.

 

[House]

Well yeah they planned the attack, came in and learned to fly planes in 8 months......it's THAT easy

Well they only had to learn how to take off.

Landing is the hard part, so that cut their training time considerably.