Do The Righties

[Sallow]

Mods? Why was the thread title changed?

You guys playing "gaslight"?

no...someone thought it a good idea to merge our threads... because heaven knows there aren't a thousand threads on susan rice and benghazi...

Yeah..but it's not my title.

And yeah..I have no idea why there are like a Kabillion threads on Benghazi..but when it's something the righties aren't to keen on..it gets merged.

 

[Valerie]

I am not being condescending but jeesus do try to keep up. I have little patience with remedial posting.

Nice try...

 

[Valerie]

Mods? Why was the thread title changed?

You guys playing "gaslight"?

no...someone thought it a good idea to merge our threads... because heaven knows there aren't a thousand threads on susan rice and benghazi...

Yeah..but it's not my title.

And yeah..I have no idea why there are like a Kabillion threads on Benghazi..but when it's something the righties aren't to keen on..it gets merged.

I thought Jill's topic was supposed to be about the political dynamics with John Kerry getting a possible S.O.S. or S.O.D. appointment...???

 

[jillian]

no...someone thought it a good idea to merge our threads... because heaven knows there aren't a thousand threads on susan rice and benghazi...

Yeah..but it's not my title.

And yeah..I have no idea why there are like a Kabillion threads on Benghazi..but when it's something the righties aren't to keen on..it gets merged.

I thought Jill's topic was supposed to be about the political dynamics with John Kerry getting a possible S.O.S. or S.O.D. appointment...???

yeah... but you know that has no relevance.

 

[Valerie]

Yeah..but it's not my title.

And yeah..I have no idea why there are like a Kabillion threads on Benghazi..but when it's something the righties aren't to keen on..it gets merged.

I thought Jill's topic was supposed to be about the political dynamics with John Kerry getting a possible S.O.S. or S.O.D. appointment...???

yeah... but you know that has no relevance.

As far as the Benghazi situation, I think it is disingenuous for anyone to say that the US Ambassador to the UN LIED to the American people.


That she knew some information which she did not mention at first does not mean she didn't have good reason for doing so in the midst of a diplomatic effort in the immediate aftermath of unprecedented violence. DUH it was terror. IMO it is foolish and harmful to harp on this the way we are... That is not to say we don't need to have access to information, just that we need to be more practical when it comes to our political approach...

 

[jillian]

I thought Jill's topic was supposed to be about the political dynamics with John Kerry getting a possible S.O.S. or S.O.D. appointment...???

yeah... but you know that has no relevance.

As far as the Benghazi situation, I think it is disingenuous for anyone to say that the US Ambassador to the UN LIED to the American people.


That she knew some information which she did not mention at first does not mean she didn't have good reason for doing so in the midst of a diplomatic effort in the immediate aftermath of unprecedented violence. DUH it was terror. IMO it is foolish and harmful to harp on this the way we are... That is not to say we don't need to have access to information, just that we need to be more practical when it comes to our political approach...

yeah... it's not like the secretary of state got up in front of the UN and lied about WMD's or anything...

oh wait...

 

[Dreamy]

I am not being condescending but jeesus do try to keep up. I have little patience with remedial posting.

Nice try...

There was little effort, trust me. Hey are you and Jillian traveling this forum as a set vALERIE? See one, see the other?

Seriously, she totally danced around what I posted about Maddow showing how she is not always the brightest one as some may offer her up as. She screws up but hey they all do. I have very little use for talking heads so I don't much care but just wanted to keep it real about Maddow. She's an f'up at times like they all are.

 

[Valerie]

I never watch her or any of the many talking heads on TV anymore. I had my fill of their "opinions" during the Bush years.






Now that said she was a Rhode Scholar and has a PHd so she is obviously intelligent. However she says: 'I'm not a TV anchor babe. I'm a big lesbian who looks like a man'

See, that is just the kind of semantic crap that will rot your brain and make you lose focus on real issues because politics has become this big game where you just want to one-up the other guy instead of prioritizing doing the right thing...


I never saw RN or SB speak on that topic but I can read your links and see what other people say about what they saw or heard or read, and what someone else wrote or opined on that etc, and eventually one might get sucked into the partisan spin one way or the other if not sharp enough to see the difference between fact and opinion, the insinuations get repeated as facts, etc. That's why I don't bother with those shows and I always prefer to focus on principles rather than politicians or talking heads.


I had also heard what Jill heard from her secretary but I don't watch RM, so maybe there are other people considering the topic, but the hacks here pounce on Jill's question like it's some big gotcha moment that RM brought it up on her show? As hard as I try, I seriously just don't get the way these people think...

I basically look at the facts. Did she or did she not do what I posted? I don't watch the shows but I do seek the truth and seeing her own words in print or her speaking on video is truth enough for me. If anything I posted was false let me know. I try to check and recheck most things before I post. I am not into team spin Valerie. Don't even want to be on a team. I have no dog in the race in the 24 news channel discussions here or the comparing of their various talking heads. They all bore me. I think most of them are pompous full of themselves blowhards but hey I am glad we can have a open discussions and disagreements on TV and online. Beats living in North Korea. I have proabbly heard her talk mostly on YT snippets and not much else. I do however read lots from both sides knowing the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

 

[Dreamy]

See, that is just the kind of semantic crap that will rot your brain and make you lose focus on real issues because politics has become this big game where you just want to one-up the other guy instead of prioritizing doing the right thing...


I never saw RN or SB speak on that topic but I can read your links and see what other people say about what they saw or heard or read, and what someone else wrote or opined on that etc, and eventually one might get sucked into the partisan spin one way or the other if not sharp enough to see the difference between fact and opinion, the insinuations get repeated as facts, etc. That's why I don't bother with those shows and I always prefer to focus on principles rather than politicians or talking heads.


I had also heard what Jill heard from her secretary but I don't watch RM, so maybe there are other people considering the topic, but the hacks here pounce on Jill's question like it's some big gotcha moment that RM brought it up on her show? As hard as I try, I seriously just don't get the way these people think...

I basically look at the facts. Did she or did she not do what I posted? I don't watch the shows but I do seek the truth and seeing her own words in print or her speaking on video is truth enough for me. If anything I posted was false let me know. I try to check and recheck most things before I post. I am not into team spin Valerie. Don't even want to be on a team. I have no dog in the race in the 24 news channel discussions here or the comparing of their various talking heads. They all bore me. I think most of them are pompous full of themselves blowhards but hey I am glad we can have a open discussions and disagreements on TV and online. Beats living in North Korea. I have proabbly heard her talk mostly on YT snippets and not much else. I do however read lots from both sides knowing the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

 

[Sallow]

yeah... but you know that has no relevance.

As far as the Benghazi situation, I think it is disingenuous for anyone to say that the US Ambassador to the UN LIED to the American people.


That she knew some information which she did not mention at first does not mean she didn't have good reason for doing so in the midst of a diplomatic effort in the immediate aftermath of unprecedented violence. DUH it was terror. IMO it is foolish and harmful to harp on this the way we are... That is not to say we don't need to have access to information, just that we need to be more practical when it comes to our political approach...

yeah... it's not like the secretary of state got up in front of the UN and lied about WMD's or anything...

oh wait...

That's sort of the problem.

The people yammering about Benghazi, gave the Bush administration so many passes it's like it was a raceway.

There are legit questions..but the folks now asking the questions aren't doing it for legit reasons.

 

[Valerie]

I basically look at the facts. Did she or did she not do what I posted? I don't watch the shows but I do seek the truth and seeing her own words in print or her speaking on video is truth enough for me. If anything I posted was false let me know. I try to check and recheck most things before I post. I am not into team spin Valerie. Don't even want to be on a team. I have no dog in the race in the 24 news channel discussions here or the comparing of their various talking heads. They all bore me. I think most of them are pompous full of themselves blowhards but hey I am glad we can have a open discussions and disagreements on TV and online. Beats living in North Korea. I have proabbly heard her talk mostly on YT snippets and not much else. I do however read lots from both sides knowing the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

Whatever you say, bitch.

 

[jillian]

I basically look at the facts. Did she or did she not do what I posted? I don't watch the shows but I do seek the truth and seeing her own words in print or her speaking on video is truth enough for me. If anything I posted was false let me know. I try to check and recheck most things before I post. I am not into team spin Valerie. Don't even want to be on a team. I have no dog in the race in the 24 news channel discussions here or the comparing of their various talking heads. They all bore me. I think most of them are pompous full of themselves blowhards but hey I am glad we can have a open discussions and disagreements on TV and online. Beats living in North Korea. I have proabbly heard her talk mostly on YT snippets and not much else. I do however read lots from both sides knowing the truth is usually somewhere in the middle.

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

i don't address hack sources. why would i?

 

[Dreamy]

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

Whatever you say, bitch.

Big time! We have met?

You are like a fish out of water when you are not in the Flame Zone Valerie.

Come on, at least pretend you are on this thread to debate.

 

[Valerie]

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

Whatever you say, bitch.

Big time! We have met?

You are like a fish out of water when you are not in the Flame Zone Valerie.

Come on, at least pretend you are on this thread to debate.

Debate what?

 

[Dreamy]

I wasn't aiming that comment at you, I was just replying to your post. I have no idea of the he said/she said semantics on that particular issue and I'm just not inclined to bother looking into it further, but that's just me...

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

i don't address hack sources. why would i?

Do you avoid facts? Hell yeah! Are you disputing she screwed up and the facts I gave? Dismissing them because you have no return? Hell yeah. Weak Jillian. You are no trial lawyer, that is for sure.

You even messed up thinking I was dissing the gal when I was simply quoting her own words. haha

 

[jillian]

As far as the Benghazi situation, I think it is disingenuous for anyone to say that the US Ambassador to the UN LIED to the American people.


That she knew some information which she did not mention at first does not mean she didn't have good reason for doing so in the midst of a diplomatic effort in the immediate aftermath of unprecedented violence. DUH it was terror. IMO it is foolish and harmful to harp on this the way we are... That is not to say we don't need to have access to information, just that we need to be more practical when it comes to our political approach...

yeah... it's not like the secretary of state got up in front of the UN and lied about WMD's or anything...

oh wait...

That's sort of the problem.

The people yammering about Benghazi, gave the Bush administration so many passes it's like it was a raceway.

There are legit questions..but the folks now asking the questions aren't doing it for legit reasons.

because none of the questions are really for ambassador rice. the questions are for the CIA and why the information may or may not have been abridged. although in reality, information is manipulated all of the time... whether because of classified information; or pending covert actions... that doesn't make it right... but it does mean that the response here is total and complete fauxrage.

which brings us to the question i asked in my o/p?

what is the reason for the fauxrage? is it, as was surmised, because the repubs want to force the president to pick kerry as his secretary of state, thereby opening his senate seat for scott brown?

 

[Dreamy]

Whatever you say, bitch.

Big time! We have met?

You are like a fish out of water when you are not in the Flame Zone Valerie.

Come on, at least pretend you are on this thread to debate.

Debate what?

Nothing cupcake. Swoooosh! We are all just here shooting the breeze.

 

[jillian]

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

i don't address hack sources. why would i?

Do you avoid facts? Hell yeah! Are you disputing she screwed up and the facts I gave? Dismissing them because you have no return? Hell yeah. Weak Jillian. You are no trial lawyer, that is for sure.

You even messed up thinking I was dissing the gal when I was simply quoting her own words. haha

sources matter. if you were a terrorist supporter using electronic intifada as a source or an anti-semite using the protocols of the lerned elders of zion, i wouldn't bother with that either.

if you have something that isn't nonsense, i'd love to discuss it. you'd do better to use your own voice than the voice of rightwingnut hacks in the blogosphere.

 

[Valerie]

Fair enough. I own what I post and yes it was condescending. I can be a smart ass and often will take that route when I see a weak debate. Dissing my sources without addressing that they offered up a truth is chicken shit. Jillian did just that.

i don't address hack sources. why would i?

Do you avoid facts? Hell yeah! Are you disputing she screwed up and the facts I gave? Dismissing them because you have no return? Hell yeah. Weak Jillian. You are no trial lawyer, that is for sure.

You even messed up thinking I was dissing the gal when I was simply quoting her own words. haha

I'm pretty sure she was referring to the article not RM ha ha.



Pity some of you can never stay off the topic of other posters and address the actual issues directly and honestly... Why does it matter whether or not Jill heard something on RM?

 

[Dreamy]

i don't address hack sources. why would i?

Do you avoid facts? Hell yeah! Are you disputing she screwed up and the facts I gave? Dismissing them because you have no return? Hell yeah. Weak Jillian. You are no trial lawyer, that is for sure.

You even messed up thinking I was dissing the gal when I was simply quoting her own words. haha

sources matter. if you were a terrorist supporter using electronic intifada as a source or an anti-semite using the protocols of the lerned elders of zion, i wouldn't bother with that either.

if you have something that isn't nonsense, i'd love to discuss it. you'd do better to use your own voice than the voice of rightwingnut hacks in the blogosphere.

I offered proven facts. You dismissed them without discussion. Now you are boring me. No biggie.