The President

[Spoonman]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

The right likes to ignore the past because it really doesn't look very good for them: Nixon and Watergate, Reagan and Iran-contra, Bush and missing WMDs. They've got to pretend these "scandals" are bad, because if the American people really thought about it, they'd never vote for a Republican again.

republicans demanded Nixon resign for his actions. koolaid drinking libs have their heads so far up obamas ass they will never admit to the total fuck up he is.

 

[The Rabbi]

Ok quick questions?

What would you think if ANY President announced he did not know what his justice Department was doing on two HIGH Profile cases, that he was never informed and he never heard about it? And then he announced after being informed of two serious offenses committed by the Justice Department that he had complete faith still in his Attorney General?

What would you think if ANY President was purposefully and willingly kept in the Dark about any suspect action by his Administration? And then claimed that he never knew but that it was a regular practice to have his aides and handlers keep him in the dark?

What would you think if ANY President not only did not know that his Ambassador was being denied security but when the shit hit the fan he claimed for 3 weeks the murder of the Ambassador was due to a video and a street riot, AFTER being briefed within hours of the attack and informed in no uncertain terms that it was a pre planned terror attack coinciding with the date it was carried out?

Well we know what most Liberals think, they find nothing wrong with the President being clueless, out of touch and leaderless. Much better he be these things then an obvious criminal.

First, With all do respect sir. These scandals seem largely manufactured in that Republicans never seem to care when their side has similar "issues".

Second, Bush ignored the August 2011 memo that said Bin Laden was going to hijack planes. Bush failed to maintain basic defense protocols and have planes "scramble ready" so that he could at least engage these "flying bombs" before they entered high population airspace. He was also told to have airport security on ultra-high alert. He ignored all of this. Instead, he fired his terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, who was first hired by Reagan and begged Bush to focus on Bin Laden rather than Saddam. Bush had no patience for anybody who took the focus off Saddam. After the attack Bush made special provisions to let members of Bin Laden family fly out of the country without being interrogated. And Then his administration used intelligence that they were told was extremely suspect to invade Iraq, where over 4,000 Americans were slaughtered. Had Obama done this, he would absolutely be in jail. Republicans would get more than an impeachment for this. It makes Watergate look like parking violation.

Third, this post is kind of hard to swallow given Iran-Contra. Reagan said he didn't know that his administration was selling massive amounts of weapons to the world's leading terrorist nation - than he continued to support many of the people in his administration who were involved.

yea, the republicans manufactured 4 dead bodies

And assaults on freedom of the press. And misuse of the IRS for political purposes.
Yes, it is all the GOP's fault.
What a fucking doofus.

 

[Spoonman]

First, With all do respect sir. These scandals seem largely manufactured in that Republicans never seem to care when their side has similar "issues".

Second, Bush ignored the August 2011 memo that said Bin Laden was going to hijack planes. Bush failed to maintain basic defense protocols and have planes "scramble ready" so that he could at least engage these "flying bombs" before they entered high population airspace. He was also told to have airport security on ultra-high alert. He ignored all of this. Instead, he fired his terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, who was first hired by Reagan and begged Bush to focus on Bin Laden rather than Saddam. Bush had no patience for anybody who took the focus off Saddam. After the attack Bush made special provisions to let members of Bin Laden family fly out of the country without being interrogated. And Then his administration used intelligence that they were told was extremely suspect to invade Iraq, where over 4,000 Americans were slaughtered. Had Obama done this, he would absolutely be in jail. Republicans would get more than an impeachment for this. It makes Watergate look like parking violation.

Third, this post is kind of hard to swallow given Iran-Contra. Reagan said he didn't know that his administration was selling massive amounts of weapons to the world's leading terrorist nation - than he continued to support many of the people in his administration who were involved.

yea, the republicans manufactured 4 dead bodies

And assaults on freedom of the press. And misuse of the IRS for political purposes.
Yes, it is all the GOP's fault.
What a fucking doofus.

under Obama, the left has sunk to new lows I didn't think even they were capable of.

 

[healthmyths]

Ok quick questions?

What would you think if ANY President announced he did not know what his justice Department was doing on two HIGH Profile cases, that he was never informed and he never heard about it? And then he announced after being informed of two serious offenses committed by the Justice Department that he had complete faith still in his Attorney General?

What would you think if ANY President was purposefully and willingly kept in the Dark about any suspect action by his Administration? And then claimed that he never knew but that it was a regular practice to have his aides and handlers keep him in the dark?

What would you think if ANY President not only did not know that his Ambassador was being denied security but when the shit hit the fan he claimed for 3 weeks the murder of the Ambassador was due to a video and a street riot, AFTER being briefed within hours of the attack and informed in no uncertain terms that it was a pre planned terror attack coinciding with the date it was carried out?

Well we know what most Liberals think, they find nothing wrong with the President being clueless, out of touch and leaderless. Much better he be these things then an obvious criminal.

Isn't it strange how out of touch Obama is as President with the doings of people HE hired...Yet when he was a senator he KNEW as he told all of us that ALL US MILITARY planners and leaders methodically and systematically "air-raided villages, killing civilians" ALL THE TIME!

Of course MOST of us didn't believe him... but the terrorists believed him and that gave them encouragement. It recruited more terrorists. Which meant Iraq was prolonged and because Obama KNEW then what he doesn't know NOW.. more soldiers were killed. American Ambassador and 3 others were murdered. But that was then... so what is the difference as Hillary said!

 

[francoHFW]

zzzzzzzzz No RW groups turned down, no WH connection, nothing. Give it up, dupes...

 

[The Rabbi]

I have come to the conclusion that Obama is guilty as hell.

Let's say you were president and suddenly through news reports you discovered that one of you agencies was engagin in illegal behavior. What would you do?

I think most people would call for a thorough and impartial investigation. Perhaps appoint a special prosecutor, or the Inspector General. Or the FBI. They would have broad powers to subpoena and take testimony. I would include Congress through the House Ethics committee or somethng in this. Some members would be privy to the ongoing investigation. When the report came out I would make it public. Then I would fire people and recommend the Justice Dept prosecute criminal acts.

Instead what has Obama done? He has changed his story several times. He has deflected blame. He has asserted his innocence. He has done the very opposite of what someone wanting to prosecute and eliminate wrongdoing would do.

The logical conclusion is that he is part of it, or at least covering for subordninates, much like Nixon did.

You are an idiot.

The President does not appoint special prosecutors.
The House ethics committee deals with ethics issues in the HOUSE.
The President does not make recommendations to the Justice Department.
The IG already investigated.
Obama has not changed his story.
He has not asserted his innocence.
He has done what is appropriate.

COMPLETE FAIL ON ALL POINTS

Congratulations.

<Cough>
Special prosecutor - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
THe president does not make recommendations to the Justice Dept? Really? Who do you think is in charge of that dept?

 

[Sallow]

Ok quick questions?

What would you think if ANY President announced he did not know what his justice Department was doing on two HIGH Profile cases, that he was never informed and he never heard about it? And then he announced after being informed of two serious offenses committed by the Justice Department that he had complete faith still in his Attorney General?

What would you think if ANY President was purposefully and willingly kept in the Dark about any suspect action by his Administration? And then claimed that he never knew but that it was a regular practice to have his aides and handlers keep him in the dark?

What would you think if ANY President not only did not know that his Ambassador was being denied security but when the shit hit the fan he claimed for 3 weeks the murder of the Ambassador was due to a video and a street riot, AFTER being briefed within hours of the attack and informed in no uncertain terms that it was a pre planned terror attack coinciding with the date it was carried out?

Well we know what most Liberals think, they find nothing wrong with the President being clueless, out of touch and leaderless. Much better he be these things then an obvious criminal.

Really?

You folks have the stones to ask these sorts of questions?

Video: Reagan and Lying: Arms for Hostages | Watch American Experience Online | PBS Video

"We did not..I repeat, did not, trade arms for hostages."

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Y2T7u8yxRE]George W Bush :The Big Lier - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Sallow]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

The right likes to ignore the past because it really doesn't look very good for them: Nixon and Watergate, Reagan and Iran-contra, Bush and missing WMDs. They've got to pretend these "scandals" are bad, because if the American people really thought about it, they'd never vote for a Republican again.

republicans demanded Nixon resign for his actions. koolaid drinking libs have their heads so far up obamas ass they will never admit to the total fuck up he is.

No they didn't.

Many circled the wagons to protect him. Seriously..who are you trying to fool?

Many of us were alive back then.

 

[NoNukes]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

You mean like all of the right wing threads about who started the KKK? That kind of living in the past?

 

[The Rabbi]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

You mean like all of the right wing threads about who started the KKK? That kind of living in the past?

No. The kind that says the economy sucks because of what George W Bush did as president but September was a long time ago.

 

[NoNukes]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

You mean like all of the right wing threads about who started the KKK? That kind of living in the past?

No. The kind that says the economy sucks because of what George W Bush did as president but September was a long time ago.

The economy does such because of what Bush did.

 

[The Rabbi]

You mean like all of the right wing threads about who started the KKK? That kind of living in the past?

No. The kind that says the economy sucks because of what George W Bush did as president but September was a long time ago.

The economy does such because of what Bush did.

See, THAT's the kind of living in the past we're talking about. Bush hasn't been president for 5 years and it's like he left office yesterday.
Meanwhile Benghazi, where 4 Americans were killed and the administration covered the whole thing up because it didnt agree with its narrative, happened in September. Which was a long time ago.

 

[BlindBoo]

the left loves to live in the past rather than solve the problems of the present.

The right likes to ignore the past because it really doesn't look very good for them: Nixon and Watergate, Reagan and Iran-contra, Bush and missing WMDs. They've got to pretend these "scandals" are bad, because if the American people really thought about it, they'd never vote for a Republican again.

republicans demanded Nixon resign for his actions. koolaid drinking libs have their heads so far up obamas ass they will never admit to the total fuck up he is.

They only did that because Nixon had to turn over the tapes and the tapes proved he was involved in illegal actions.

The Republicans still have nothing on President Obama.

 

[The Rabbi]

The right likes to ignore the past because it really doesn't look very good for them: Nixon and Watergate, Reagan and Iran-contra, Bush and missing WMDs. They've got to pretend these "scandals" are bad, because if the American people really thought about it, they'd never vote for a Republican again.

republicans demanded Nixon resign for his actions. koolaid drinking libs have their heads so far up obamas ass they will never admit to the total fuck up he is.

They only did that because Nixon had to turn over the tapes and the tapes proved he was involved in illegal actions.

The Republicans still have nothing on President Obama.

Yet.
At this point in Watergate Nixon was promising a full investigation.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

I can recall a president that was the darling of the right who sold weapons to one set of murderers and gave the proceeds to another set of murderers, but claimed he knew nothing about it. Sort of puts the Obama "scandals" in perspective, doesn't it?

Reagan deserved to be impeached, no doubt of that. Obama deserves to be removed from office, too. It remains to be seen if congress has the backbone to do it this time.

One can only hope.

 

[The Rabbi]

I can recall a president that was the darling of the right who sold weapons to one set of murderers and gave the proceeds to another set of murderers, but claimed he knew nothing about it. Sort of puts the Obama "scandals" in perspective, doesn't it?

Reagan deserved to be impeached, no doubt of that. Obama deserves to be removed from office, too. It remains to be seen if congress has the backbone to do it this time.

One can only hope.

Remind me why Reagan deserved to be impeached.

 

[Dot Com]

Ok quick questions?

What would you think if ANY President announced he did not know what his justice Department was doing on two HIGH Profile cases, that he was never informed and he never heard about it? And then he announced after being informed of two serious offenses committed by the Justice Department that he had complete faith still in his Attorney General?

What would you think if ANY President was purposefully and willingly kept in the Dark about any suspect action by his Administration? And then claimed that he never knew but that it was a regular practice to have his aides and handlers keep him in the dark?

What would you think if ANY President not only did not know that his Ambassador was being denied security but when the shit hit the fan he claimed for 3 weeks the murder of the Ambassador was due to a video and a street riot, AFTER being briefed within hours of the attack and informed in no uncertain terms that it was a pre planned terror attack coinciding with the date it was carried out?

Well we know what most Liberals think, they find nothing wrong with the President being clueless, out of touch and leaderless. Much better he be these things then an obvious criminal.

First, With all do respect sir. The outrage over these overblown scandals seems silly when you consider that Republicans never seem to care when their side has similar "issues".

Second, Bush ignored the August 2011 memo that said Bin Laden was going to hijack planes. Bush failed to maintain basic defense protocols and have planes "scramble ready" so that he could at least engage these "flying bombs" before they entered high population airspace. He was also told to have airport security on ultra-high alert. He ignored all of this. Instead, he fired his terrorism advisor, Richard Clarke, who was first hired by Reagan and begged Bush to focus on Bin Laden rather than Saddam. Bush had no patience for anybody who took the focus off Saddam because of a pre-planned attack on Iraq which stemmed from a longstanding neocon goal of regime change (supported by Clinton as well). After the attack Bush made special provisions to let members of Bin Laden family fly out of the country without being interrogated. And Then his administration used intelligence that they were told was extremely suspect to invade Iraq, where over 4,000 Americans were slaughtered. Had Obama done this, he would absolutely be in jail. Republicans would get more than an impeachment for this. It makes Watergate look like a parking violation.

Third, this post is kind of hard to swallow given Iran-Contra. Reagan said he didn't know that his administration was selling massive amounts of weapons to the world's leading terrorist nation - than he continued to support many of the people in his administration who were involved.

yep. whatever may have happened here is like a parking ticket compared to the Gipper (Raygun) arming terrists.

 

[Truthseeker420]

Ok quick questions?

What would you think if ANY President announced he did not know what his justice Department was doing on two HIGH Profile cases, that he was never informed and he never heard about it? And then he announced after being informed of two serious offenses committed by the Justice Department that he had complete faith still in his Attorney General?

What would you think if ANY President was purposefully and willingly kept in the Dark about any suspect action by his Administration? And then claimed that he never knew but that it was a regular practice to have his aides and handlers keep him in the dark?

What would you think if ANY President not only did not know that his Ambassador was being denied security but when the shit hit the fan he claimed for 3 weeks the murder of the Ambassador was due to a video and a street riot, AFTER being briefed within hours of the attack and informed in no uncertain terms that it was a pre planned terror attack coinciding with the date it was carried out?

Well we know what most Liberals think, they find nothing wrong with the President being clueless, out of touch and leaderless. Much better he be these things then an obvious criminal.

Same as I do any fictional story. Grab some popcorn and watch the drama.

 

[Starlight]

The scandals mentioned regarding, Reagan, Bush and Nixon, involve 3 other Presidents. The scandals going on now, are only involving one President. There are so many things he doesn't know about when asked, it's not conducive to feeling confident that he will know about terrorists threatening and acting on their threats either.

Maybe if the Boston Bombers would have been investigated as strongly as the conservatives and the AP have been, things could have been different.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

You mean like all of the right wing threads about who started the KKK? That kind of living in the past?

No. The kind that says the economy sucks because of what George W Bush did as president but September was a long time ago.

The economy does such because of what Bush did.

It contnues to suck because Obama has the same economic policy.