Question for "objective" right-wingers.....

[nat4900]

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

Thank you....I'll print your brilliant answers as soon as possible.....After all, I may be out of toilet paper.

 

[Correll]

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

Thank you....I'll print your brilliant answers as soon as possible.....After all, I may be out of toilet paper.

And you still just spew bullshit.

You asshole.

 

[Kobie]

answered based on the assumption that you did not already know the answers.

Yes, and after a careful review of your "brilliant" answers, indeed they were written on the tablets from Mt. Sinai....Ergo, how could ANYONE possible dispute those "answers"?

(right wingers be dumber than they were yesterday....and that is not an easy task.)

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

And the reason for this, quite obviously, is because Bush is a Republican and Obama is a Democrat.

 

[Correll]

answered based on the assumption that you did not already know the answers.

Yes, and after a careful review of your "brilliant" answers, indeed they were written on the tablets from Mt. Sinai....Ergo, how could ANYONE possible dispute those "answers"?

(right wingers be dumber than they were yesterday....and that is not an easy task.)

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

And the reason for this, quite obviously, is because Bush is a Republican and Obama is a Democrat.

NOpe. The reasons have been explained to you.

THat you ignore the stated reasons and misrepresent our reasons as strawmen, is a form of lying.

Why do you feel the need to lie?

Rhetorical question. Because at some level you know the truth doesn't work for you.

 

[Kobie]

answered based on the assumption that you did not already know the answers.

Yes, and after a careful review of your "brilliant" answers, indeed they were written on the tablets from Mt. Sinai....Ergo, how could ANYONE possible dispute those "answers"?

(right wingers be dumber than they were yesterday....and that is not an easy task.)

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

And the reason for this, quite obviously, is because Bush is a Republican and Obama is a Democrat.

NOpe. The reasons have been explained to you.

THat you ignore the stated reasons and misrepresent our reasons as strawmen, is a form of lying.

Why do you feel the need to lie?

Rhetorical question. Because at some level you know the truth doesn't work for you.

Oh, go fuck yourself.

At no point have I said that 9/11 was 100% Bush's fault; THAT would be idiotic. However, your stance appears to be that he bears NO responsibility for any missteps along the way.

On that same token, it also appears to be your stance that Libya was 100% Obama's fault, even though the events that led to the Arab Spring, which eventually led to Benghazi, were bubbling up well before he became president and, in numerous cases, were completely out of American control. Again, Obama isn't NOT in any way at fault, but it ain't 100% either.

So please, tell me more about lies, asshole.

 

[Correll]

answered based on the assumption that you did not already know the answers.

Yes, and after a careful review of your "brilliant" answers, indeed they were written on the tablets from Mt. Sinai....Ergo, how could ANYONE possible dispute those "answers"?

(right wingers be dumber than they were yesterday....and that is not an easy task.)

I'm not the one lying here, you are.

You're the blind partisan, not me.

Bush was not responsible for 9-11. Obama was responsible for Libya.

The reasons have been explained to you.

And the reason for this, quite obviously, is because Bush is a Republican and Obama is a Democrat.

NOpe. The reasons have been explained to you.

THat you ignore the stated reasons and misrepresent our reasons as strawmen, is a form of lying.

Why do you feel the need to lie?

Rhetorical question. Because at some level you know the truth doesn't work for you.

Oh, go fuck yourself.

At no point have I said that 9/11 was 100% Bush's fault; THAT would be idiotic. However, your stance appears to be that he bears NO responsibility for any missteps along the way.

On that same token, it also appears to be your stance that Libya was 100% Obama's fault, even though the events that led to the Arab Spring, which eventually led to Benghazi, were bubbling up well before he became president and, in numerous cases, were completely out of American control.

So please, tell me more about lies, asshole.

Nat's saying that.

No. 9-11 was a sucker punch. We didn't see it coming. THat's why the "right wingers" don't blame Bush.

Libya was a dumb move, destabilizing an tired old dictator who was quiet and turning libya into a problem for US, and then putting an embassy there.

That's why I blame Obama for that.

 

[Kobie]

Nat's saying that.

No. 9-11 was a sucker punch. We didn't see it coming. THat's why the "right wingers" don't blame Bush.

Libya was a dumb move, destabilizing an tired old dictator who was quiet and turning libya into a problem for US, and then putting an embassy there.

That's why I blame Obama for that.

No, they blame Clinton instead.

 

[nat4900]

Beside all his OTHER PROBLEMS, Corell has reading comprehension to add to that long list.....

The Benghazi witch hunt will be yet another reason why right wingers will NOT see the WH for another decade...
(Well, maybe they can join the tourist cues to see the inside of the WH).

 

[Correll]

Nat's saying that.

No. 9-11 was a sucker punch. We didn't see it coming. THat's why the "right wingers" don't blame Bush.

Libya was a dumb move, destabilizing an tired old dictator who was quiet and turning libya into a problem for US, and then putting an embassy there.

That's why I blame Obama for that.

No, they blame Clinton instead.

Clinton presided over a lot of restrictions on intel sharing, and let a lot of terror attacks go unanswered. He is certainly a more reasonable target than Bush.

But still, it was a surprise attack that no one saw coming.

 

[Correll]

Beside all his OTHER PROBLEMS, Corell has reading comprehension to add to that long list.....

The Benghazi witch hunt will be yet another reason why right wingers will NOT see the WH for another decade...
(Well, maybe they can join the tourist cues to see the inside of the WH).

No, importing millions of Third World voters is what is driving political trends now.

 

[nat4900]

No, importing millions of Third World voters is what is driving political trends now.

Absolutely....AND we let dead people ALSO vote democrat....I think you're royally screwed.

 

[chikenwing]

Beside all his OTHER PROBLEMS, Corell has reading comprehension to add to that long list.....

The Benghazi witch hunt will be yet another reason why right wingers will NOT see the WH for another decade...
(Well, maybe they can join the tourist cues to see the inside of the WH).

Objective,that's rather funny,safe bet that all those,objective posters can explain,just once,why Rice was sent out with a pile of lies .Give objectivity a real try!

 

[Correll]

No, importing millions of Third World voters is what is driving political trends now.

Absolutely....AND we let dead people ALSO vote democrat....I think you're royally screwed.

All the issues you libs love to go on about, hasn't let you win the white vote.

But, increasing the demographics you have won in the past, so that they are a bigger part of the overall vote?

THat's been working fine.

Bhengazi is nothing compared to that.

 

[nat4900]

Objective,that's rather funny,safe bet that all those,objective posters can explain,just once,why Rice was sent out with a pile of lies .Give objectivity a real try!

Absolutely...hang on to that mantra....Exactly how many days AFTER the Benghazi attack did Rice go out there to address the issue? Was it correct????

Until TODAY, that illustrious [witch hunt] committee has NOT officially proven Rice wrong....Of course, morons get their opinions from FOX .

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Bush left Clinton's intelligence people in place because he knew 9/11 was inevitable and wanted to make sure Dems had some skin in the game

Frank is back!

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Richard Clarke

Bush Administration's First Memo
on al-Qaeda Declassified

January 25, 2001 Richard Clarke Memo:
"We urgently need . . . a Principals level
review on the al Qida network."

Document Central to Clarke-Rice Dispute on Bush Terrorism Policy Pre-9/11

National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 147

Edited by Barbara Elias

February 10, 2005 - Original Post

Update - September 27, 2006

Bush Administration's First Memo on al-Qaeda Declassified

 

[nat4900]

All the issues you libs love to go on about, hasn't let you win the white vote.

But, increasing the demographics you have won in the past, so that they are a bigger part of the overall vote?

Yes, if you could only bring back those good old days in the plantations......those days is when you could hold back those darkies and white rule was supreme.

Have you lit up any crosses on someone's lawn lately?

(BTW, I am WHITE, MALE and OLDER......and THANK GOD I'm not as sick as you morons are.)

 

[Correll]

All the issues you libs love to go on about, hasn't let you win the white vote.

But, increasing the demographics you have won in the past, so that they are a bigger part of the overall vote?

Yes, if you could only bring back those good old days in the plantations......those days is when you could hold back those darkies and white rule was supreme.

Have you lit up any crosses on someone's lawn lately?

(BTW, I am WHITE, MALE and OLDER......and THANK GOD I'm not as sick as you morons are.)

Nothing in your post had anything to do with my post.

You dems have a great strategy for elections, I agree with you on that.

But it has nothing to do with any of the issues, such as Bhengazi, as you erroneously claimed.

Which is what I was responding to. (see how that works? I crafted my response to address the point you made. You should try that)

If it did, we would see movement in the White Vote, the one ethnic group that hasn't yet been indoctrinated with Identity Politics.

 

[nat4900]

White Vote, the one ethnic group that hasn't yet been indoctrinated with Identity Politics.

Yes, the Aryan nation might rise again

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

that they had to indicate an attack would happen.
Clinton however should have been at least curious why muslims were learning to fly but not interested in how to land.

Not true. Clarke has never claimed Clinton ignored as Bush did

and wtf is up with the flight school and Clinton? Huh?