Why can't Republicans explain their "Fiscal Policy"?

[EdwardBaiamonte]

Just "cut taxes".

I hate to break it to him, if you don't have a job, you aren't worrying about "taxes".

So is that it? Cut taxes? Nothing else? If there is more, what is it?

there is no more. The more you tax an economy the more you strangle it. If you are among the 24 million unemployed in Barry's depression you want huge tax cuts, now, obviously!!

 

[Rshermr]

Just "cut taxes".

I hate to break it to him, if you don't have a job, you aren't worrying about "taxes".

So is that it? Cut taxes? Nothing else? If there is more, what is it?

there is no more. The more you tax an economy the more you strangle it. If you are among the 24 million unemployed in Barry's depression you want huge tax cuts, now, obviously!!

Poor ed. Still confused. Can not explain why with a bad economy, Reagan lowered taxes and drove the unemployment rate up over the next 18 months to 10.8%. Highest in the history of the US since the great republican depression.
Then, reagan raised taxes 11 times, borrowed enough to triple the national debt, and spent on stimulus. And the Unemployment rate went DOWN. Poor ed. He can not understand that. But he knows it is true, so he will not challenge it. Because he knows I can show him the numbers. Poor ed.

And, poor ed can not explain why clinton, facing high unemployment numbers, raised tax rates AND the unemployment rate went down. Way down. And we had the best economy for the entire century. Poor ed. The numbers are just all wrong.
And poor ed, can not actually aqrgue that all the unemployed happened during and as a result of the great republican recession of 2008. But it can be shown. Poor ed.

 

[Oldstyle]

You amuse as always...you rant about Fox being unreliable and then you come right back with biased sources like The New York Times and The Guardian to prove that Fast & Furious isn't something that Eric Holder holds responsibility for?

Sorry, I just do not use fox. For most everyone, both the NY Times and the Guardian are great impartial sources. Expecially, my poor ignorant con, when they are simply providing information straight from an investigation by the JUSTICE DEPT. Dipshit. Get a clue. If you read the report, or listened to actual news, you would learn that Holder was completely exhonorated. Completely, Oldstyle That would be because he did not start the program, and stopped it as soon as he learned about its activities. Just think what you could know, if only you read actual impartial data. So, perhaps you have an impartial source that says that he does.

How amazingly convenient that they release a "scathing" critique of the governmental agencies involved but exonerate the men in charge of those agencies...Eric Holder and Barack Obama.

Well, oldstyle, that does sound like a fox kind of statement that you just made. I wonder where you could have come up with that sentence. First, you apparently assume that Holder has been there since F and F started. Which he was not. Second, you must assume that he was aware of it for a long period of it working, which he was not. And third, you must be ignorant, which you are. Finally, you must not believe the dept of Justice. So you must have additional evidence, that the repubs committee could not come up with. Because of all of your investigative resources. As far a Obama is concerned, he was not involved. Look up NOT INVOLVED. And was charged with nothing except perhaps by some bat shit crazy con tools like you, and without any proof, like you. Perhaps I am underestimating you (a first, if so) and your own investigation proved he DID know a whole lot. You have that evidence, Oldstyle, lets see it. Otherwise, you may want to simply state that you do not, and appologise for acting like a dipshit. You know, what Jindle said about repubs Really applies to you.
Which is again untrue, as the dept of defense said. Again, do you have some proof of your statement, or just more talking out of your ass.

.Really? To actually wait until you get the truth. Not oldstyle. He prefers to simply wants to take the word of Fox and the bat shit crazy con web sites and START BLAMING. And again you make statements without proof. Straight out of your ass again

..when those very same Obama Administration officials did their utmost to mislead the American people as to what actually happened in Libya and continue to do so.

Out of your ass again.

That Senate hearing with Hilary Clinton was a joke. What difference does it make if it was a planned terrorist attack or just some people walking around who decided to attack? Did our Secretary of State REALLY make that statement? It MATTERS because she deliberately misled us for purely political reasons.

And again right out of your ass.

You know what, Oldstyle, rational people are just as interested in the truth as you are. So far, all indecations are that we have had it. EXCEPT for statements from FOX and the BAT SHIT CRAZY CON WEB SITES. And CON TOOLS LIKE YOU.

The funny thing is, even after the truth comes out and the report is dry, even if all charges by you dipshits are untrue, and Hillarry and Obama are again LILLY CLEAN, you will still be out there spouting the charges coming from your bat shit crazy con sites. Because, Oldstyle, you do not care about the truth. You just need to post dogma. And truth has never mattered to you.

Look at the F and F findings, and see how wrong the charges were. And wonder just a bit if the carrges of Benghazi are equally wrong. Which they probably will be. And try to wait a while to see the truth. Unless, as we all suspect, you are simply a con tool.

Or, you could, if you cared, get you head out of the fox lies for a bit and look at the findings of the report released less than a week ago:
The Ghosts of Benghazi
"The final report on the attack on the U.S. consulate makes one thing clear: Republican charges of a cover-up are pure fiction."
Benghazi report: not a cover-up. - Slate Magazine
You could start apologizing now for your comments. You could admit that you have no impartial evidence. Just statements from far right bat shit crazy con sites, and FOX. But then you will not. Because you have no integrity. Never did, oldstyle. Never did.

And, by the way, why WERE Fox and the other con sites so uninterested in 221 marines dying in Libya in 1983 when it was Reagan who was president. No concern at all. Interesting.
And why are repubs, who voted down money for those consolates in places like and including Libya, which would have been used for added security had it been available, somehow making no mea culpas. Any idea, Oldstyle, or are you going to simply ignore my questions. Thought so.

The Fast & Furious program did in fact start during 2009 under the auspices of the Holder Justice Department. Now you can make the claim that because Holder has stated that he personally knew nothing about Fast & Furious until Sen. Chuck Grassley's letter two years later, he's not "responsible" but that begs the question...WHY NOT? One of the agencies that Holder was in charge of was letting massive numbers of guns "walk" into Mexico and be sold to violent drug cartels to be used for criminal activities. How could he NOT know? That's his fucking job!!! You laughably arrive at the conclusion that Holder is blameless because of his spot on imitation of Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Hero's. "I see nothing...I know NOTHING!!!"

 

[Oldstyle]

As for Benghazi? Once again you've got Hilary Clinton stating that she didn't know that Ambassador Stevens had repeatedly asked for additional security leading up to 9/11. Once again you've got an Obama Administration official who's defense of a charge of not doing their job is that they just didn't know about it! Once again I ask why not? Who's in charge of the State Department? It isn't Susan Rice!!! It's Hilary Clinton! Hilary Clinton is the one who misled the American people about what happened in Benghazi. She may not have known about Ambassador Stevens requests for additional security BEFORE the attacks but she damn will knew about the requests for emergency aid while they were OCCURRING! So what happened that day and night? Why were Americans allowed to die in an attack that spanned a twelve hour period of time without SOMEONE going to their aid? Our Secretary of State asks the question why it matters what happened if four men are dead? It MATTERS because people's lives were needlessly lost because of what appears to be gross incompetence.

 

[rdean]

Right, Oldstyle, and a Fox regular. Not as you would have us believe, a person who occasionally appears on fox. Really, Oldstyle. And graduating years ago from Cal Berkley does not make one a liberal, except if you are a con. Lets see what she does on FOX.


Read more: Nina Easton | Biography | Fox News

In addition, she is married to Russell Schriefer, a Republican political strategist and a senior adviser to the presidential campaign of Mitt Romney. Sounds like a good, impartial source to me.

We could go further, but the point is, she is a Fox regular. Many, many appearances. So, Oldstyle, you are apparently trying to say that Fox has her on regularly for her impartial views. But that, me boy, does not pass the giggle test. Fox never, ever has anyone on its entertainment network who does not assist in its continual attack on anything progressive. Nice try.

True. The second largest shareholder in Fox is Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal. While his share may seem insignificant to non thinking right wingers, his shares added to Rupert Murdoch's are enough to prevent a hostile takeover. That gives him much too much power. He has boasted he got Fox to change their programming. The Prince is famous for his telethons which raise money for the families of suicide bombers. Which only creates incentives.

While I'm not normally into conspiracy theories, my feeling is Fox is working to divide and bring down this country. They have done a pretty incredible job so far. Thank God their base is shrinking. Growing old and dying. They want everyone to know they have the largest audience, but if you add up Logo, BET, the Spanish networks and all the other networks aimed at minorities, their total surpasses Fox. Like the Republican Party, which is more than 90% white, I suspect Fox mirrors Republican demographics.

Fox is working to bring down America? LOL Why...because they are the only major news outlet that isn't heavily slanted to the left? If it wasn't for Fox News we would never have gotten to the bottom of Fast & Furious or what happened in Benghazi. The rest of the main stream media is so awed by Barack Obama he could squat and take a dump right on their anchor desk and they'd all applaud like he just cured cancer.

There is a difference between "slanted to the right" and "batshit crazy".

Fast and Furious - Bush

Benghazi - al Qaeda

Who knows? If Republicans hadn't let Bin Laden go and didn't ignore him for years, perhaps Benghazi never would have happened. Republicans are the best thing that ever happened to al Qaeda.

 

[Rshermr]

You amuse as always...you rant about Fox being unreliable and then you come right back with biased sources like The New York Times and The Guardian to prove that Fast & Furious isn't something that Eric Holder holds responsibility for?

Sorry, I just do not use fox. For most everyone, both the NY Times and the Guardian are great impartial sources. Expecially, my poor ignorant con, when they are simply providing information straight from an investigation by the JUSTICE DEPT. Dipshit. Get a clue. If you read the report, or listened to actual news, you would learn that Holder was completely exhonorated. Completely, Oldstyle That would be because he did not start the program, and stopped it as soon as he learned about its activities. Just think what you could know, if only you read actual impartial data. So, perhaps you have an impartial source that says that he does.

Well, oldstyle, that does sound like a fox kind of statement that you just made. I wonder where you could have come up with that sentence. First, you apparently assume that Holder has been there since F and F started. Which he was not. Second, you must assume that he was aware of it for a long period of it working, which he was not. And third, you must be ignorant, which you are. Finally, you must not believe the dept of Justice. So you must have additional evidence, that the repubs committee could not come up with. Because of all of your investigative resources. As far a Obama is concerned, he was not involved. Look up NOT INVOLVED. And was charged with nothing except perhaps by some bat shit crazy con tools like you, and without any proof, like you. Perhaps I am underestimating you (a first, if so) and your own investigation proved he DID know a whole lot. You have that evidence, Oldstyle, lets see it. Otherwise, you may want to simply state that you do not, and appologise for acting like a dipshit. You know, what Jindle said about repubs Really applies to you.
Which is again untrue, as the dept of defense said. Again, do you have some proof of your statement, or just more talking out of your ass.

.Really? To actually wait until you get the truth. Not oldstyle. He prefers to simply wants to take the word of Fox and the bat shit crazy con web sites and START BLAMING. And again you make statements without proof. Straight out of your ass again Out of your ass again.

That Senate hearing with Hilary Clinton was a joke. What difference does it make if it was a planned terrorist attack or just some people walking around who decided to attack? Did our Secretary of State REALLY make that statement? It MATTERS because she deliberately misled us for purely political reasons.

And again right out of your ass.

You know what, Oldstyle, rational people are just as interested in the truth as you are. So far, all indecations are that we have had it. EXCEPT for statements from FOX and the BAT SHIT CRAZY CON WEB SITES. And CON TOOLS LIKE YOU.

The funny thing is, even after the truth comes out and the report is dry, even if all charges by you dipshits are untrue, and Hillarry and Obama are again LILLY CLEAN, you will still be out there spouting the charges coming from your bat shit crazy con sites. Because, Oldstyle, you do not care about the truth. You just need to post dogma. And truth has never mattered to you.

Look at the F and F findings, and see how wrong the charges were. And wonder just a bit if the carrges of Benghazi are equally wrong. Which they probably will be. And try to wait a while to see the truth. Unless, as we all suspect, you are simply a con tool.

Or, you could, if you cared, get you head out of the fox lies for a bit and look at the findings of the report released less than a week ago:
The Ghosts of Benghazi
"The final report on the attack on the U.S. consulate makes one thing clear: Republican charges of a cover-up are pure fiction."
Benghazi report: not a cover-up. - Slate Magazine
You could start apologizing now for your comments. You could admit that you have no impartial evidence. Just statements from far right bat shit crazy con sites, and FOX. But then you will not. Because you have no integrity. Never did, oldstyle. Never did.

And, by the way, why WERE Fox and the other con sites so uninterested in 221 marines dying in Libya in 1983 when it was Reagan who was president. No concern at all. Interesting.
And why are repubs, who voted down money for those consolates in places like and including Libya, which would have been used for added security had it been available, somehow making no mea culpas. Any idea, Oldstyle, or are you going to simply ignore my questions. Thought so.

The Fast & Furious program did in fact start during 2009 under the auspices of the Holder Justice Department. Now you can make the claim that because Holder has stated that he personally knew nothing about Fast & Furious until Sen. Chuck Grassley's letter two years later, he's not "responsible" but that begs the question...WHY NOT? One of the agencies that Holder was in charge of was letting massive numbers of guns "walk" into Mexico and be sold to violent drug cartels to be used for criminal activities. How could he NOT know? That's his fucking job!!! You laughably arrive at the conclusion that Holder is blameless because of his spot on imitation of Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Hero's. "I see nothing...I know NOTHING!!!"

He heads the JUSTICE DEPT. Not the little operation going on in Arizona. Running guns into mexico had been going on for two or three years, useing the same process, and the same atf agent was in charge of all of them including F and F. When Holder learned of it he shut it down. And he should have been told sooner. So, I know you would like to make that his fault, but here is the thing, Oldstyle. That is because you are a con. The agency who investigated republican charges found that Holder was not responsible, and did not know what was going on. But that he did shut it down when he found out.
But what is funny is that you are so well alligned with the right wing nut cases who have gone after this issue for very obviously political reasons. The whole contempt of court thing was, as the defense dept findings pointed out, without merit of any kind. but they did come before the election. And it is doubtful that Issa and his boys thought the defense dept would come out with a report as soon as they did.

But there is oldstyle, who claims he is not a conservative tool, out there after the defense department findings, still trying to make this an issue. No one but right wing bat shit crazy con sites, Fox, and OLDSTYLE.

 

[Rshermr]

As for Benghazi? Once again you've got Hilary Clinton stating that she didn't know that Ambassador Stevens had repeatedly asked for additional security leading up to 9/11. Once again you've got an Obama Administration official who's defense of a charge of not doing their job is that they just didn't know about it! Once again I ask why not? Who's in charge of the State Department? It isn't Susan Rice!!! It's Hilary Clinton! Hilary Clinton is the one who misled the American people about what happened in Benghazi. She may not have known about Ambassador Stevens requests for additional security BEFORE the attacks but she damn will knew about the requests for emergency aid while they were OCCURRING! So what happened that day and night? Why were Americans allowed to die in an attack that spanned a twelve hour period of time without SOMEONE going to their aid? Our Secretary of State asks the question why it matters what happened if four men are dead? It MATTERS because people's lives were needlessly lost because of what appears to be gross incompetence.

You know what, oldstyle. You can make all the accusations you want. No one believes you really care. You are simply a con tool asking questions that have been answered and attacking Clinton as though it was second nature for you, which it is. You have taken her words out of context, which is no surprise for you. But here is the thing, Oldstyle, again the investigation has shown nothing that the bat shit crazy con sites have said is true. It has shown that what you have said is untrue. And it has found hillary and obama free of any blame. So, again, there is oldstyle, out there with the bat shit crazy con web sites, and fox. And no one else. looking about as foolish as Rand Paul in the hearing being beaten like a drum by clinton. Funny.

Oldstyle, I have been suggesting for a long time that all the studies that say cons are stupid are valid. Now, Jindal has added credence to that belief. But you, my boy, make the case as well as any con tool out there. Stupid. Just stupid statements.

 

[Oldstyle]

Sorry, I just do not use fox. For most everyone, both the NY Times and the Guardian are great impartial sources. Expecially, my poor ignorant con, when they are simply providing information straight from an investigation by the JUSTICE DEPT. Dipshit. Get a clue. If you read the report, or listened to actual news, you would learn that Holder was completely exhonorated. Completely, Oldstyle That would be because he did not start the program, and stopped it as soon as he learned about its activities. Just think what you could know, if only you read actual impartial data. So, perhaps you have an impartial source that says that he does.

Well, oldstyle, that does sound like a fox kind of statement that you just made. I wonder where you could have come up with that sentence. First, you apparently assume that Holder has been there since F and F started. Which he was not. Second, you must assume that he was aware of it for a long period of it working, which he was not. And third, you must be ignorant, which you are. Finally, you must not believe the dept of Justice. So you must have additional evidence, that the repubs committee could not come up with. Because of all of your investigative resources. As far a Obama is concerned, he was not involved. Look up NOT INVOLVED. And was charged with nothing except perhaps by some bat shit crazy con tools like you, and without any proof, like you. Perhaps I am underestimating you (a first, if so) and your own investigation proved he DID know a whole lot. You have that evidence, Oldstyle, lets see it. Otherwise, you may want to simply state that you do not, and appologise for acting like a dipshit. You know, what Jindle said about repubs Really applies to you.
Which is again untrue, as the dept of defense said. Again, do you have some proof of your statement, or just more talking out of your ass.

.Really? To actually wait until you get the truth. Not oldstyle. He prefers to simply wants to take the word of Fox and the bat shit crazy con web sites and START BLAMING. And again you make statements without proof. Straight out of your ass again Out of your ass again. And again right out of your ass.

You know what, Oldstyle, rational people are just as interested in the truth as you are. So far, all indecations are that we have had it. EXCEPT for statements from FOX and the BAT SHIT CRAZY CON WEB SITES. And CON TOOLS LIKE YOU.

The funny thing is, even after the truth comes out and the report is dry, even if all charges by you dipshits are untrue, and Hillarry and Obama are again LILLY CLEAN, you will still be out there spouting the charges coming from your bat shit crazy con sites. Because, Oldstyle, you do not care about the truth. You just need to post dogma. And truth has never mattered to you.

Look at the F and F findings, and see how wrong the charges were. And wonder just a bit if the carrges of Benghazi are equally wrong. Which they probably will be. And try to wait a while to see the truth. Unless, as we all suspect, you are simply a con tool.

Or, you could, if you cared, get you head out of the fox lies for a bit and look at the findings of the report released less than a week ago:
The Ghosts of Benghazi
"The final report on the attack on the U.S. consulate makes one thing clear: Republican charges of a cover-up are pure fiction."
Benghazi report: not a cover-up. - Slate Magazine
You could start apologizing now for your comments. You could admit that you have no impartial evidence. Just statements from far right bat shit crazy con sites, and FOX. But then you will not. Because you have no integrity. Never did, oldstyle. Never did.

And, by the way, why WERE Fox and the other con sites so uninterested in 221 marines dying in Libya in 1983 when it was Reagan who was president. No concern at all. Interesting.
And why are repubs, who voted down money for those consolates in places like and including Libya, which would have been used for added security had it been available, somehow making no mea culpas. Any idea, Oldstyle, or are you going to simply ignore my questions. Thought so.

The Fast & Furious program did in fact start during 2009 under the auspices of the Holder Justice Department. Now you can make the claim that because Holder has stated that he personally knew nothing about Fast & Furious until Sen. Chuck Grassley's letter two years later, he's not "responsible" but that begs the question...WHY NOT? One of the agencies that Holder was in charge of was letting massive numbers of guns "walk" into Mexico and be sold to violent drug cartels to be used for criminal activities. How could he NOT know? That's his fucking job!!! You laughably arrive at the conclusion that Holder is blameless because of his spot on imitation of Sgt. Schultz from Hogan's Hero's. "I see nothing...I know NOTHING!!!"

He heads the JUSTICE DEPT. Not the little operation going on in Arizona. Running guns into mexico had been going on for two or three years, useing the same process, and the same atf agent was in charge of all of them including F and F. When Holder learned of it he shut it down. And he should have been told sooner. So, I know you would like to make that his fault, but here is the thing, Oldstyle. That is because you are a con. The agency who investigated republican charges found that Holder was not responsible, and did not know what was going on. But that he did shut it down when he found out.
But what is funny is that you are so well alligned with the right wing nut cases who have gone after this issue for very obviously political reasons. The whole contempt of court thing was, as the defense dept findings pointed out, without merit of any kind. but they did come before the election. And it is doubtful that Issa and his boys thought the defense dept would come out with a report as soon as they did.

But there is oldstyle, who claims he is not a conservative tool, out there after the defense department findings, still trying to make this an issue. No one but right wing bat shit crazy con sites, Fox, and OLDSTYLE.

You've got an agency of the US Department of Justice which is headed up by Eric Holder running thousands of guns into another sovereign country which are then used by violent drug gangs to kill innocent civilians and this goes on for several YEARS and Holder doesn't know a thing about it until Chuck Grassley tells him about it in a letter? Here's your choice in that scenario, Rshermr...either Eric Holder is grossly incompetent or he's lying...take your pick.

As for when Holder "shut down" Fast & Furious? That didn't happen until a US Border Patrol agent was killed by one of the weapons that were allowed to "walk" and the story of what they'd been doing FINALLY became public. Only THEN did Holder shut it down.

And I don't have the faintest idea what you're babbling about when you keep talking about a Defense Department investigation. The investigation was conducted by the Justice Department's Inspector General. You know as little about this subject apparently as you do about economics!

 

[Oldstyle]

As for Benghazi? Once again you've got Hilary Clinton stating that she didn't know that Ambassador Stevens had repeatedly asked for additional security leading up to 9/11. Once again you've got an Obama Administration official who's defense of a charge of not doing their job is that they just didn't know about it! Once again I ask why not? Who's in charge of the State Department? It isn't Susan Rice!!! It's Hilary Clinton! Hilary Clinton is the one who misled the American people about what happened in Benghazi. She may not have known about Ambassador Stevens requests for additional security BEFORE the attacks but she damn will knew about the requests for emergency aid while they were OCCURRING! So what happened that day and night? Why were Americans allowed to die in an attack that spanned a twelve hour period of time without SOMEONE going to their aid? Our Secretary of State asks the question why it matters what happened if four men are dead? It MATTERS because people's lives were needlessly lost because of what appears to be gross incompetence.

You know what, oldstyle. You can make all the accusations you want. No one believes you really care. You are simply a con tool asking questions that have been answered and attacking Clinton as though it was second nature for you, which it is. You have taken her words out of context, which is no surprise for you. But here is the thing, Oldstyle, again the investigation has shown nothing that the bat shit crazy con sites have said is true. It has shown that what you have said is untrue. And it has found hillary and obama free of any blame. So, again, there is oldstyle, out there with the bat shit crazy con web sites, and fox. And no one else. looking about as foolish as Rand Paul in the hearing being beaten like a drum by clinton. Funny.

Oldstyle, I have been suggesting for a long time that all the studies that say cons are stupid are valid. Now, Jindal has added credence to that belief. But you, my boy, make the case as well as any con tool out there. Stupid. Just stupid statements.

Clinton and Obama are "free of any blame"? Because...I suppose...the buck NEVER stops with anyone in charge with this Administration. If you were to believe the story you've put forth the President, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General don't have a CLUE what's going on with the entities that THEY oversee. Holder didn't have a clue about Fast & Furious...Clinton didn't have a clue about Benghazi...and Obama doesn't have a clue about ANYTHING that goes wrong on his watch. Does that pretty much sum it up?

 

[Rshermr]

As for Benghazi? Once again you've got Hilary Clinton stating that she didn't know that Ambassador Stevens had repeatedly asked for additional security leading up to 9/11. Once again you've got an Obama Administration official who's defense of a charge of not doing their job is that they just didn't know about it! Once again I ask why not? Who's in charge of the State Department? It isn't Susan Rice!!! It's Hilary Clinton! Hilary Clinton is the one who misled the American people about what happened in Benghazi. She may not have known about Ambassador Stevens requests for additional security BEFORE the attacks but she damn will knew about the requests for emergency aid while they were OCCURRING! So what happened that day and night? Why were Americans allowed to die in an attack that spanned a twelve hour period of time without SOMEONE going to their aid? Our Secretary of State asks the question why it matters what happened if four men are dead? It MATTERS because people's lives were needlessly lost because of what appears to be gross incompetence.

You know what, oldstyle. You can make all the accusations you want. No one believes you really care. You are simply a con tool asking questions that have been answered and attacking Clinton as though it was second nature for you, which it is. You have taken her words out of context, which is no surprise for you. But here is the thing, Oldstyle, again the investigation has shown nothing that the bat shit crazy con sites have said is true. It has shown that what you have said is untrue. And it has found hillary and obama free of any blame. So, again, there is oldstyle, out there with the bat shit crazy con web sites, and fox. And no one else. looking about as foolish as Rand Paul in the hearing being beaten like a drum by clinton. Funny.

Oldstyle, I have been suggesting for a long time that all the studies that say cons are stupid are valid. Now, Jindal has added credence to that belief. But you, my boy, make the case as well as any con tool out there. Stupid. Just stupid statements.

Clinton and Obama are "free of any blame"? Because...I suppose...the buck NEVER stops with anyone in charge with this Administration. If you were to believe the story you've put forth the President, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General don't have a CLUE what's going on with the entities that THEY oversee. Holder didn't have a clue about Fast & Furious...Clinton didn't have a clue about Benghazi...and Obama doesn't have a clue about ANYTHING that goes wrong on his watch. Does that pretty much sum it up?

What pretty much sums it up, Oldstyle, is that what you just said is exactly what the studies concluded. They were not to blame. What you would like everyone to believe, of course, is what the bat shit crazy con tool web sites and fox wants everyone to believe. And you. What a coincidence. And what is certain is that all that you have been saying came from the same conservative talking points and the same conservative machine that spends every single minute of every single day attacking the democratic president and his administration. And when the truth finally comes out, you see that they were lying all along. And yet Oldstyle, well, Oldstyle parrots what they say like they were truthful all along. Just impartial news sources. And, And the next time, when the next attack on the president comes along from the same sources, the same thing happens. Because ....Well, because that is what Oldstyle does. He always parrots their propoganda. Every single time. NOT because Oldstyle does not know it is propaganda. But because he is a tool, and that is what he does. He is a foot soldier for the fox propaganda, which is exactly the same as the propaganda coming from the bat shit crazy con sites. Because, you see, Oldstyle does not care about truth. Truth is simply of no import. And oldstyle sees no reason to look at what the impartial sources say. No reason at all. He simply engages in the propaganda of his con masters.

Just as when crap blew up in libya in 1983, someone should have known. And not a few people, but 221 Marines should not have been killed. It is a dangerous place, people make mistakes, and SHIT HAPPENS. And yup, Reagan did not know. Lots of people did not know. And you know what, all those entities that attack democratic presidents and their people, said nothing. Total silence. Nothing from Fox at all, Nothing from the then bat shit crazy noise machine that was there at that time. And every person backed the republican president. And I am absolutely certain that OLDSTYLE was quiet.

What do you think would have happened, Oldstyle, had the president been a democrat.

It is over, Oldstyle. People take a while to understand the truth. The con machine puts out those lies, and has for decades now. And over time, people have become wise. And the Rand Pauls of the republican party, blathering on tv, are no longer making hay for the republican noise machine. Instead, they are pissing people off. People like you saying that Clinton said those people did not matter, changing her context to what they want people to believe, look no longer anything other than pathetic tools. Just sad little pathetic tools who can not think for themselves. Pathetic little people with pathetic little minds. And pathetic little lives with dishonest objectives. Obvious dishonest objectives.

 

[Oldstyle]

You know what, oldstyle. You can make all the accusations you want. No one believes you really care. You are simply a con tool asking questions that have been answered and attacking Clinton as though it was second nature for you, which it is. You have taken her words out of context, which is no surprise for you. But here is the thing, Oldstyle, again the investigation has shown nothing that the bat shit crazy con sites have said is true. It has shown that what you have said is untrue. And it has found hillary and obama free of any blame. So, again, there is oldstyle, out there with the bat shit crazy con web sites, and fox. And no one else. looking about as foolish as Rand Paul in the hearing being beaten like a drum by clinton. Funny.

Oldstyle, I have been suggesting for a long time that all the studies that say cons are stupid are valid. Now, Jindal has added credence to that belief. But you, my boy, make the case as well as any con tool out there. Stupid. Just stupid statements.

Clinton and Obama are "free of any blame"? Because...I suppose...the buck NEVER stops with anyone in charge with this Administration. If you were to believe the story you've put forth the President, the Secretary of State and the Attorney General don't have a CLUE what's going on with the entities that THEY oversee. Holder didn't have a clue about Fast & Furious...Clinton didn't have a clue about Benghazi...and Obama doesn't have a clue about ANYTHING that goes wrong on his watch. Does that pretty much sum it up?

What pretty much sums it up, Oldstyle, is that what you just said is exactly what the studies concluded. They were not to blame. What you would like everyone to believe, of course, is what the bat shit crazy con tool web sites and fox wants everyone to believe. And you. What a coincidence. And what is certain is that all that you have been saying came from the same conservative talking points and the same conservative machine that spends every single minute of every single day attacking the democratic president and his administration. And when the truth finally comes out, you see that they were lying all along. And yet Oldstyle, well, Oldstyle parrots what they say like they were truthful all along. Just impartial news sources. And, And the next time, when the next attack on the president comes along from the same sources, the same thing happens. Because ....Well, because that is what Oldstyle does. He always parrots their propoganda. Every single time. NOT because Oldstyle does not know it is propaganda. But because he is a tool, and that is what he does. He is a foot soldier for the fox propaganda, which is exactly the same as the propaganda coming from the bat shit crazy con sites. Because, you see, Oldstyle does not care about truth. Truth is simply of no import. And oldstyle sees no reason to look at what the impartial sources say. No reason at all. He simply engages in the propaganda of his con masters.

Just as when crap blew up in libya in 1983, someone should have known. And not a few people, but 221 Marines should not have been killed. It is a dangerous place, people make mistakes, and SHIT HAPPENS. And yup, Reagan did not know. Lots of people did not know. And you know what, all those entities that attack democratic presidents and their people, said nothing. Total silence. Nothing from Fox at all, Nothing from the then bat shit crazy noise machine that was there at that time. And every person backed the republican president. And I am absolutely certain that OLDSTYLE was quiet.

What do you think would have happened, Oldstyle, had the president been a democrat.

It is over, Oldstyle. People take a while to understand the truth. The con machine puts out those lies, and has for decades now. And over time, people have become wise. And the Rand Pauls of the republican party, blathering on tv, are no longer making hay for the republican noise machine. Instead, they are pissing people off. People like you saying that Clinton said those people did not matter, changing her context to what they want people to believe, look no longer anything other than pathetic tools. Just sad little pathetic tools who can not think for themselves. Pathetic little people with pathetic little minds. And pathetic little lives with dishonest objectives. Obvious dishonest objectives.

Dude, you are the pathetic little person who has to lie about who he is in order to save face on an internet chat board. All I've done is point out that both Eric Holder and Hilary Clinton have used the excuse that they didn't know what was going on in the departments that they oversee and have used THAT as the reason why they are "blameless" for Fast & Furious and Benghazi, which simply proves that they have been negligent in their duties and people have paid for that negligence with their lives.

The "con machine" isn't putting out lies. Republicans are asking for explanations about what happened and why...and officials for this Administration are doing their very best Watergate imitation and stonewalling investigations at every turn.

I never said Clinton said those "people" did not matter...I pointed out that her comment that it didn't matter if the attack was carried out by organized terrorists or a spontaneous mob protesting a video LIKE SHE LED US TO BELIEVE!...was an outrageous thing for her to say. It does in fact matter because it shows us quite clearly that our Secretary of State and our President were willing to lie to us to further their political ambitions.

 

[Katzndogz]

Republicans explain all the time. We just have a media that keeps such explanations out of the news. Sort of like the way the media has successfully portrayed Congress of not passing a budget, when it's really the democrat controlled Senate.

 

[Rshermr]

So, Oldstyle, being a con tool, just can not let it go:::

Dude, you are the pathetic little person who has to lie about who he is in order to save face on an internet chat board.

I never lie, as you know, dipshit. But you do. As you do here. And over and over.

All I've done is point out that both Eric Holder and Hilary Clinton have used the excuse that they didn't know what was going on in the departments that they oversee and have used THAT as the reason why they are "blameless" for Fast & Furious and Benghazi, which simply proves that they have been negligent in their duties and people have paid for that negligence with their lives.

Right. And you ignored, I am sure by mistake, that Hillary took full responsibility. And ignored the point that they have been found totally free of guilt by the investigation just published. Nice. And Reagan and his team, me boy. You keep forgetting. There were warnings before that bombing, and yet there was never a con machine screaming about that occurance. Why is that, Oldstyle.

The "con machine" isn't putting out lies. Republicans are asking for explanations about what happened and why...and officials for this Administration are doing their very best Watergate imitation and stonewalling investigations at every turn.

That, me boy, is what is technically known as complete bullshit. And proves again that you do indeed lie. Here is an example:
"[T]he president and his advisers repeatedly told us the attack was spontaneous reaction to the anti-Muslim video and that it lacked information suggesting it was a terrorist assault," wrote Jennifer Rubin, president of the Washington Post's Mitt Romney fan club. "Bottom line? Barack Obama was willfully and knowingly lying to the American people," wrote Danielle Pletka, vice president for foreign and defense policy studies at the American Enterprise Institute. "
But there are plenty more. Like the one saying that the attack was being watched real time on tv by the administration. Pure fantasy, but all over the bat shit crazy con sites. Hundreds of statements repeated thousands of times.
Uh, Oldstyle, those are ja few. Now PROVEN untrue, but put out there with NO EVIDENCE. And repeated by at least 15 con tool sites. You are a congenital liar. Just can not help yourself. Regardless of evidence, you have to post the conservative propaganda. Hell, we could go out to Palins statements. Pure nasty lies, put out on all the con tool sites. thousands of postings all over the web in many con web sites. And well coordinated. Dipshit.

I never said Clinton said those "people" did not matter...I pointed out that her comment that it didn't matter if the attack was carried out by organized terrorists or a spontaneous mob protesting a video LIKE SHE LED US TO BELIEVE!...was an outrageous thing for her to say. It does in fact matter because it shows us quite clearly that our Secretary of State and our President were willing to lie to us to further their political ambitions.

Jesus, Oldstyle. You just can not help yourself. You simply have to lie. What she said was that it did not matter at the TIME. The hearing was about what went wrong in Benghazi, and not about who did the killing. That was already pretty much determined. What the meeting was supposed to be about was what to do to keep such things from happening again. Now, Oldstyle, try to pay attention. What she said, and it was obvious, was that whether it was a random mob or an organized attack, what needed to happen was to determine what should happen to see that consolates are better protected in the future. Her response, by the way, was to an attack by a republican making totally untrue accusations. A simple political attack. Which pretty much everyone understood was stupid, and lacked any truth. Except, of cource, cons like you. Oldstyle, the world has passed you by. Everyone but you understands that the republican attack, waged by fox and the bat shit crazy con sites, was simply bullshit. But go ahead. Keep pushing it. It is clear who you are from the drivel that comes from your mouth.

By the way, you are avoiding the question of why fox and you were not at all outraged by the lack of government support for the marines in Libya in 1983. You remember, under a REPUBLICAN administration. And not a few, but over 200 americans were killed. But NOT A SOUND FROM OLDSTYLE. Nothing. Just crickets. And over 200 were killed.

Do you think it is obvious that you are a conservative tool????

 

[Oldstyle]

Why you think the bombing of the Marine barracks is the same as what happened in Libya is laughable. To begin with...it was a suicide truck bombing that was over in a matter of seconds. There was no failure by the Reagan White House to respond over many hours as Americans were being hunted and killed like there was in Libya with the Obama White House. Furthermore, Ronald Reagan didn't try to mislead us as to what happened in Beirut (not Libya...you moron!) in 1983. He took responsibility for what happened. He didn't try to cover it up.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for what Clinton supposedly meant?

Hillary Clinton on Benghazi Talking Points: ?What difference at this point does it make?? [VIDEO] | The Right Sphere

This is the video clip. She's being grilled over misleading the American people when she repeatedly stated that it was a spontaneous attack sprung from protests over an offensive video. Watch how she desperately tries to change the topic of conversation from WHY she went with a "story" that she knew was completely false to the importance of finding out who it was that did the crime.

That's a career politician at work...dodging the question in about as obvious a manner as I've ever seen as she hides behind her "anger" at being accused of doing EXACTLY what she did and having to explain her actions.

 

[Rshermr]

So, Oldstyle says:

Why you think the bombing of the Marine barracks is the same as what happened in Libya is laughable.

I did not say it was the same. But it was preventable.

To begin with...it was a suicide truck bombing that was over in a matter of seconds.

And your point is??

There was no failure by the Reagan White House to respond over many hours as Americans were being hunted and killed like there was in Libya with the Obama White House.

Which is untrue. Read what actually happened. And stop lying. Or being stupid, whichever.
First, you are talking about the response from the dod. Which you apparently do not understand could not get there, because of distances involved, for over 13 hours. But all four were dead within a fairly short time.

Furthermore, Ronald Reagan didn't try to mislead us as to what happened in Beirut (not Libya...you moron!) in 1983. He took responsibility for what happened.

As did clinton, dipshit.

He didn't try to cover it up.

Nor did Obama. Nor Clinton. As the report proves. You moron.

So, oldstyle. What you are saying is that if we had another killing of over 200 americans in
Beirut. say, next week, that we would not have conservative sites, and nut cases like you, makeing all sorts of accusations before the facts were known. Really, Oldstyle??? Even though there had been concerns voiced over the safety of those people. Even though the administration said nothing about what happened for a good deal of time??? Do you want someone to believe that piece of nonsence??? Sorry, oldstyle. You are what you are. Not the least interested in finding out what happened so that it can be prevented. Just wanting to make accusations without proof. You are a pathetic conservative tool. Sad.

 

[Rshermr]

As for what Clinton supposedly meant?

Hillary Clinton on Benghazi Talking Points: ?What difference at this point does it make?? [VIDEO] | The Right Sphere

This is the video clip. She's being grilled over misleading the American people when she repeatedly stated that it was a spontaneous attack sprung from protests over an offensive video. Watch how she desperately tries to change the topic of conversation from WHY she went with a "story" that she knew was completely false to the importance of finding out who it was that did the crime.

That's a career politician at work...dodging the question in about as obvious a manner as I've ever seen as she hides behind her "anger" at being accused of doing EXACTLY what she did and having to explain her actions.

no, actually, that is a career conservative tool pushing his propaganda. And interpreting. You exist in your world, oldstyle. Happily, only a relatively small percentage of the population believes what they want to believe, regardless of the evidence. You are really pathetic.
But at least, we get to see one of your favorite sites. Right Sphere, Oldstyle. So, another lie unmasked. Your statement that you do not frequent right wing bat shit crazy web sites, up in smoke. Right Sphere. Nice, oldstyle. Always trying to get the non partisan truth.

 

[Oldstyle]

As usual, Rshermr...you spout off about things that you obviously don't know anything about other than the propaganda you've been fed by your favorite progressive web sites.

All four did NOT die within a "fairly short time" as you state. The initial attack started at 9:42 PM on Sept. 11...the attack that killed the two ex-Navy Seals at the Annex began at 5:15 AM on September 12th a full seven hours after the initial attack. So what you'd like us to believe is that the United States of America couldn't get ANY military assets...no drones...no fighter planes...no Special Forces on site in a space of 7 hours? That's bullshit and if you buy that excuse you're more naive than usual. Those ex-Seals were calling for air strikes...air strikes that couldn't be delivered because the assets that would have allowed that to take place were not sent.

Clinton took "responsibility" after lying about how it happened in the first place but in doing so she also did her level best to point an accusing finger at someone else...as her testimony about budget cuts being to blame shows...even though one of her own State Department officials testified under oath that a lack of funding was never an issue in how security was assigned.

Did you hear Clinton explain why she repeatedly claimed that it was a spontaneous attack springing from protests of the You Tube video? I must have missed that. That was the part where she angrily asked why it mattered.

 

[Oldstyle]

As for what Clinton supposedly meant?

Hillary Clinton on Benghazi Talking Points: ?What difference at this point does it make?? [VIDEO] | The Right Sphere

This is the video clip. She's being grilled over misleading the American people when she repeatedly stated that it was a spontaneous attack sprung from protests over an offensive video. Watch how she desperately tries to change the topic of conversation from WHY she went with a "story" that she knew was completely false to the importance of finding out who it was that did the crime.

That's a career politician at work...dodging the question in about as obvious a manner as I've ever seen as she hides behind her "anger" at being accused of doing EXACTLY what she did and having to explain her actions.

no, actually, that is a career conservative tool pushing his propaganda. And interpreting. You exist in your world, oldstyle. Happily, only a relatively small percentage of the population believes what they want to believe, regardless of the evidence. You are really pathetic.
But at least, we get to see one of your favorite sites. Right Sphere, Oldstyle. So, another lie unmasked. Your statement that you do not frequent right wing bat shit crazy web sites, up in smoke. Right Sphere. Nice, oldstyle. Always trying to get the non partisan truth.

Are you making the charge that Right Sphere doctored the video? That is was cut or edited in a misleading fashion? I simply Googled it and took the most complete clip of that part of her testimony that I could find after looking at others that were in fact edited. If you'd like to provide an alternate video that disproves what I just provided I'd love to see it.

 

[Toddsterpatriot]

Just "cut taxes".

I hate to break it to him, if you don't have a job, you aren't worrying about "taxes".

So is that it? Cut taxes? Nothing else? If there is more, what is it?

there is no more. The more you tax an economy the more you strangle it. If you are among the 24 million unemployed in Barry's depression you want huge tax cuts, now, obviously!!

Poor ed. Still confused. Can not explain why with a bad economy, Reagan lowered taxes and drove the unemployment rate up over the next 18 months to 10.8%. Highest in the history of the US since the great republican depression.
Then, reagan raised taxes 11 times, borrowed enough to triple the national debt, and spent on stimulus. And the Unemployment rate went DOWN. Poor ed. He can not understand that. But he knows it is true, so he will not challenge it. Because he knows I can show him the numbers. Poor ed.

And, poor ed can not explain why clinton, facing high unemployment numbers, raised tax rates AND the unemployment rate went down. Way down. And we had the best economy for the entire century. Poor ed. The numbers are just all wrong.
And poor ed, can not actually aqrgue that all the unemployed happened during and as a result of the great republican recession of 2008. But it can be shown. Poor ed.

Can not explain why with a bad economy, Reagan lowered taxes and drove the unemployment rate up over the next 18 months to 10.8%.

Reagan's tax cuts didn't drive up unemployment, silly liberal.