Nobama..Plausible Deniability

*couch* Iran/Contra *cough* *cough*

Alright. I've heard just about enough about the Iran Contra scandal. We live in the year 2013, the President is Barack H. Obama. This isn't 1986. When Democrats are called out for the failures of their leaders, they deflect to the failures of leaders from the opposing party. If it's true, take responsibility for it.

If you realize, Reagan was never implicated for any wrongdoing in the affair, the investigative reports issued afterwards made clear that officials in his administration acted without his authorization in sending aid to the contras. Reagan was never informed because they never chose to inform him, although he took the shot to the chin, the Congressional Investigation and the Tower Commission ultimately cleared him of any misdeeds.

We need to live in the present people.

So, when a person makes a statement like this:

"And the fact that obama is the least informed Pres of all time"

...it's supposed to go unrebutted regardless of how utterly lacking in facts it is?

And if you claim Reagan wasn't informed, doesn't that make him "uninformed?" And shouldn't he have been informed? Imagine if it turned out we were secretly waging a war in Syria and the public found out about it and Obama claimed ignorance of the matter? Holy Christ, the collective apoplectic fit by the right would be heard on Mars.
Sallow needs to post one of his fav links

the one where Reagan admitted on national tv that he did it.

so once again

Either obama has no fucking idea, on a historic level, what's going on, or he's lying and you're an idiot for thinking he's not one or the other
 
Oh come on.. There must be a limit even for Democrats...sheesh...

Let us know when he is making deals with terrorist nations to win an election or finance south american death squads.

Or lying about the nuclear (nucular) ambitions of a US puppet state to knock it over.

Then we can talk.

So here at home, it's ok with you whatever he does? Are you really an American???
 
Exactly, and while St Ronnie was unaware of what was going on right under his nose in the White House, Obama is supposed to know what goes on in a department he is supposed to stay away from at an arms length.

Hey, did Obama not appoint the leaders of the Justice Department, The IRS and the State Department? What now? You simply don't think he appointed them without knowing what they were capable of, now do you?
Not one person in the IRS scandal was appointed by Obama. So you are saying that Bush appointed them knowing what they would do under Obama. :cuckoo:


What..?..are you saying Bush must have appointed them to undermine the Republican Party and their political supporters...brilliant & :wtf:
 
Exactly, and while St Ronnie was unaware of what was going on right under his nose in the White House, Obama is supposed to know what goes on in a department he is supposed to stay away from at an arms length.

Hey, did Obama not appoint the leaders of the Justice Department, The IRS and the State Department? What now? You simply don't think he appointed them without knowing what they were capable of, now do you?
Not one person in the IRS scandal was appointed by Obama. So you are saying that Bush appointed them knowing what they would do under Obama. :cuckoo:

What?

Surely we didn't vote for them?

Eric Holder was appointed to office in 2009! Hillary was appointed in 2009 as well!

Lois Lerner was made director of the Tax Exempt Branch of the IRS under Bush in 2005 by then Commissioner Mark. W. Everson. She most certainly didn't pull this crap under Bush, did she? Yeah, right.

So, my argument remains solid. You on the other hand, have no more than a red herring.
 
Last edited:
:lalala:..Democrats seem distracted in this thread...just sayin
 

Forum List

Back
Top