SNL rips Darrel Issa's little side-show a new asshole

[chikenwing]

LOL! Now you folks are just being silly.
That list was debunked awhile ago.
Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush

Deficits, Medicare Part D socialism, and now embassy attacks... what was once okay is now all suddenly outrageous according to the Right.

The GOP has no credibility , and it's losses in 2008 & 2012 were a result of this lack of credibility.

So how do you square 2010 midterms??

 

[jasonnfree]

Americans were killed on Bush's watch.

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

 

[chikenwing]

Americans were killed on Bush's watch.

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

Then why the BS from Rice and Obama himself,they knew what they were telling us was crap,denying that is just another lie.

Are they that void of integrity they must lie about a "big nothing"

Besides bringing up Bush has no relevance what so ever.

 

[jasonnfree]

Here is a list from the following listed site for attacks on diplomatic mission since 2008.

2011 United States Syria Damascus, Syria Syrian civil war[11]
2011 United States Afghanistan Kabul, Afghanistan 2011 Kabul Attacks[12]
2011 United States Bosnia and Herzegovina Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina [13]
2012 United States Egypt Cairo, Egypt 2012 attack on the American Embassy in Egypt[16]
2012 United States Libya Benghazi, Libya 4 U.S. Consulate attack in Benghazi[17]
2012 United States Yemen Sanaa, Yemen 2012 attack on the American Embassy in Yemen[18]

List of attacks on diplomatic missions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Looks like Obama is actually keeping pace with Bush if not more so. And to parrot Hillary "What difference does it make at this point?"

Nothing is going to come of the hearings Obama and Hillary will once again skate but those who were put into risk and died at Banghazi deserve a fair hearing. They don't deserve the disrespect that the liberal left and SNL is putting on them to try and protect the image of our liar in chief. There is no doubt that they are all lying but lying, except under oath, is not a crime.

What is hilarious if not infuriating is that the liberal left thinks themselves so smart when they come up with these idiotic excuses. Patting each other on the backs as if their disrespect for those who died is not sickening. If I were the liberal left I would let the hearings run their course, they will go no where and it will blow away. But no they make it worse with their shear idiocy. I really do believe they lost the map to the high road.

Things like integrity and morality are missing in these people they have no shame.

Put them all under oath,everyone,including Obama.

Clinton proved that being under oath is not a problem and the liberal left let his skate proving it. So putting Obama and Hillary under oath while a good idea is not the same as getting the truth. It will take whistleblowers to get to the truth.

Let's put everything out including bush and wmd's. Send us someone besides Isaa. This lizard couldn't pass a security background check to get a federal government job due to hes scrapes with the law in the past. This is nothing but a way to short circuit a Hillary run in 2016. Not that I'm one of her fans by a long shot. Her claim to fame is being married to a president period.

 

[plant]

Americans were killed on Bush's watch.

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

Benghazi is nothing but political hay for Hillary nothing more nothing less . Americans are watching republicants

 

[Freewill]

Americans were killed on Bush's watch.

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

The Iraq resolution:

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]

• Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
  
• Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
  
• Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
  
• Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
  
• Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
  
• Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
  
• Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
  
• Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
  
• The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.
  
• The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
  
• The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
  
• Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."

Remember, this was a bi-partisan vote.

 

[jasonnfree]

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

Then why the BS from Rice and Obama himself,they knew what they were telling us was crap,denying that is just another lie.

Are they that void of integrity they must lie about a "big nothing"

Besides bringing up Bush has no relevance what so ever.

Bringing up bush has all the relevance in the world if you're worried about lying and covering up which no republican on this forum cares about that's for sure. There's no statute of limitations on murder
Just the numbers alone. Thousands of G.I.'s dead or injured, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead or injured, the cost of Iraq to run into the trillions for the next couple decades. No relevance?

 

[chikenwing]

Remember, this was a bi-partisan vote.

Not in the minds of the truly dishonest, The Dems totally lost all creditability when they voted to go into Iraq,then turned tail as soon as they saw political opportunities,its prolonged the conflict and cost countless lives for both sides. Reprehensible,and undefended able by anyone with a shred of decency.

 

[dilloduck]

Remember, this was a bi-partisan vote.

Not in the minds of the truly dishonest, The Dems totally lost all creditability when they voted to go into Iraq,then turned tail as soon as they saw political opportunities,its prolonged the conflict and cost countless lives for both sides. Reprehensible,and undefended able by anyone with a shred of decency.

Accepting responsibilty isn't a liberal strong point.

 

[chikenwing]

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

Then why the BS from Rice and Obama himself,they knew what they were telling us was crap,denying that is just another lie.

Are they that void of integrity they must lie about a "big nothing"

Besides bringing up Bush has no relevance what so ever.

Bringing up bush has all the relevance in the world if you're worried about lying and covering up which no republican on this forum cares about that's for sure. There's no statute of limitations on murder
Just the numbers alone. Thousands of G.I.'s dead or injured, hundreds of thousands of Iraqis dead or injured, the cost of Iraq to run into the trillions for the next couple decades. No relevance?

No just deflection,10 years and no indictments,but many investigations,why is that?

I didn't believe we should have invaded,but our elected official,FROM BOTH PARTIES voted to go,you can't blame just Bush,unless you a worm.

 

[OriginalShroom]

I am still trying to figure why certain Liberals here keep posting a lie after they have been shown that it is a lie.

I can understand trusting a source and posting information from them without checking it because you do trust them. Everyone does it.

But to keep posting it after it has been proven to be false is inexcusable. Being wrong is forgivable. Lying is not.

 

[Oddball]

SNL?

When was the last time that show was funny or even socially relevant?....1993?

 

[jasonnfree]

Americans were killed on every presidents watch. What about that blood thirst Lincoln fella? Where does he get off?

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

The Iraq resolution:

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]

• Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
  
• Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
  
• Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
  
• Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
  
• Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
  
• Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
  
• Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
  
• Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
  
• The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.
  
• The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
  
• The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
  
• Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."

Remember, this was a bi-partisan vote.

You can bring all these points up about Iraq but bush was going around selling his snake oil about WMD's in case you don't remember. Most harmful weapons known to man blah blah and he got Colin Powell to help sell this b.s. and Powell knows he was used which is one of the reasons he voted for obama, to stick it up republicans rear ends and break it off. No proof of WMD's which we know about from Downing Street memos which was basically how we can sell this war. Maybe you should read it. Anyway, lets investigate. Republicans should be happy there are floozies like obama around that wouldn't do anything so bold. A Kucinich or a Ralph Nader would.

 

[Oddball]

I am still trying to figure why certain Liberals here keep posting a lie after they have been shown that it is a lie.

It's what they do.

 

[Freewill]

Things like integrity and morality are missing in these people they have no shame.

Put them all under oath,everyone,including Obama.

Clinton proved that being under oath is not a problem and the liberal left let his skate proving it. So putting Obama and Hillary under oath while a good idea is not the same as getting the truth. It will take whistleblowers to get to the truth.

Let's put everything out including bush and wmd's. Send us someone besides Isaa. This lizard couldn't pass a security background check to get a federal government job due to hes scrapes with the law in the past. This is nothing but a way to short circuit a Hillary run in 2016. Not that I'm one of her fans by a long shot. Her claim to fame is being married to a president period.

Funny you mention that, Obama couldn't get a security clearance either considering his admitted drug use, living overseas under an assumed name, his trips to countries to which travel was banned.

 

[jasonnfree]

I am still trying to figure why certain Liberals here keep posting a lie after they have been shown that it is a lie.

I can understand trusting a source and posting information from them without checking it because you do trust them. Everyone does it.

But to keep posting it after it has been proven to be false is inexcusable. Being wrong is forgivable. Lying is not.

Be a little more specific. What are you referring to? That I'm posting lies about WMD's being a manufactured lie? If so, where have I been shown to be wrong? I'll check back later for response. I won't accept buzzwords like "liberals" as an answer. gotta go

 

[Freewill]

Because there's much evidence that bush got us into Iraq for reasons other tha WMD's. Benghazi's a big nothing compared to Iraq.

The Iraq resolution:

The resolution cited many factors to justify the use of military force against Iraq:[2][3]

• Iraq's noncompliance with the conditions of the 1991 ceasefire agreement, including interference with U.N. weapons inspectors.
  
• Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, and programs to develop such weapons, posed a "threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region."
  
• Iraq's "brutal repression of its civilian population."
  
• Iraq's "capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people".
  
• Iraq's hostility towards the United States as demonstrated by the 1993 assassination attempt on former President George H. W. Bush and firing on coalition aircraft enforcing the no-fly zones following the 1991 Gulf War.
  
• Members of al-Qaeda, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq.
  
• Iraq's "continu[ing] to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations," including anti-United States terrorist organizations.
  
• Iraq paid bounty to families of suicide bombers.
  
• The efforts by the Congress and the President to fight terrorists, and those who aided or harbored them.
  
• The authorization by the Constitution and the Congress for the President to fight anti-United States terrorism.
  
• The governments in Turkey, Kuwait, and Saudi Arabia feared Saddam and wanted him removed from power.
  
• Citing the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998, the resolution reiterated that it should be the policy of the United States to remove the Saddam Hussein regime and promote a democratic replacement.

The resolution "supported" and "encouraged" diplomatic efforts by President George W. Bush to "strictly enforce through the U.N. Security Council all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq" and "obtain prompt and decisive action by the Security Council to ensure that Iraq abandons its strategy of delay, evasion, and noncompliance and promptly and strictly complies with all relevant Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq."

The resolution authorized President Bush to use the Armed Forces of the United States "as he determines to be necessary and appropriate" in order to "defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council Resolutions regarding Iraq."

Remember, this was a bi-partisan vote.

You can bring all these points up about Iraq but bush was going around selling his snake oil about WMD's in case you don't remember. Most harmful weapons known to man blah blah and he got Colin Powell to help sell this b.s. and Powell knows he was used which is one of the reasons he voted for obama, to stick it up republicans rear ends and break it off. No proof of WMD's which we know about from Downing Street memos which was basically how we can sell this war. Maybe you should read it. Anyway, lets investigate. Republicans should be happy there are floozies like obama around that wouldn't do anything so bold. A Kucinich or a Ralph Nader would.

You calling Powell a liar? You calling Hillary a liar? You calling Bill Clinton a liar?

 

[OriginalShroom]

SNL?

When was the last time that show was funny or even socially relevant?....1993?

You can tell when the left is worried about something.

SNL starts mocking it.

 

[velvtacheeze]

LOL! Now you folks are just being silly.
That list was debunked awhile ago.
Liberals Use Grossly Misleading Graphic And List To Compare Benghazi To Other Embassy Attacks Under Bush

Deficits, Medicare Part D socialism, and now embassy attacks... what was once okay is now all suddenly outrageous according to the Right.

The GOP has no credibility , and it's losses in 2008 & 2012 were a result of this lack of credibility.

So how do you square 2010 midterms??

Not enough Democratic voters showed up.

118 million total voters in 2012
82 million total voters 2010
132 million total voters in 2008

2010 was an anomoly, driven by lower turnout of Dems, and a highly motivated, angry base of GOP voters.

There were no policy mistakes of the Democrats that led to the 2010 election results. This is unlike the 2006 election results which was driven by the mismanagement of the wars by the GOP. So awful was the GOP's handling of the wars and the economy, that memories of it have led to two more justified trouncings in 2008 and 2012.

GOP voters need to learn from their mistakes, accept the fact that conservative polices are the problem, and moderate them. They haven't done that yet.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is how bad it is in Obamaland....SNL routines over a pointless list