Politics and Religion

Re: Yada, Yada just like this dude........
salonpas 618 reads
posted

ush sure looks very Presidential. Never happened before to a U.S. President in office?

The State Dept botched Benghazi and Americans died but the media and public have lost interest. If you ask people on the street about Benghazi they'll think you are talking about the Cincinnati Bengals. Like Hillary said "what difference does it make".

JackDunphy525 reads

Once again, Obama Inc. lied to the American people. They knew within hours that it wasn't any "spontaneous uprising." They made it sound like a bunch of peeps throwing a few stones.  

The facility was mortared and RPG's were used. Not stuff one picks up at Home Depot. It was a planned, terrorist attack and Hils and Barry let that Susan Rice address the Sunday talk shows FIVE DAYS later and allowed her to flat out lie to the American public, 6 weeks before an election. Fkin criminals.

...and Ronald Reagan turned tail and ran.  Why didn't he bomb Lebanon back to the Stone Age?

But the media and public have lost interest.  If you ask people on the street about Beirut, they'll think you are talking about a salad ingredient - "bay root?"

I have no idea idea what your response on any lack of retaliation for Beirut (or Benghazzi) has to do with the post.  Did Reagan and/or his people lie about what happened in Beirut for political gain?  I really have no idea so please enlighten me.

salonpas692 reads

.........An independent review of the September 11 attacks on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi showed "systemic failures and leadership and management deficiencies" at the State Department.

The failures resulted in a security plan "that was inadequate for Benghazi and grossly inadequate to deal with the attack that took place," the 39-page, unclassified version of the report concluded.

The board also cited a lack of resources as at least partly to blame. "The solution, the report stated, requires a more serious and sustained commitment from Congress to support State Department needs.

The board found that Washington tended "to overemphasize the positive impact of physical security upgrades ... while generally failing to meet Benghazi's repeated requests" to beef up personnel

LucasHood524 reads

I thought we did bomb the shit out of them? Even used battleships if I recall correctly?

Posted By: BigPapasan
...and Ronald Reagan turned tail and ran.  Why didn't he bomb Lebanon back to the Stone Age?

But the media and public have lost interest.  If you ask people on the street about Beirut, they'll think you are talking about a salad ingredient - "bay root?"

salonpas626 reads

.........Hillary's Benghazi hiccup pales in comparison. Just saying!

LucasHood781 reads

And how about the civil war brewing between the greens and the mainstream Dems pushing shale oil/NG and the pipeline?  

Posted By: salonpas
.........Hillary's Benghazi hiccup pales in comparison. Just saying!

salonpas583 reads

The Republican party has basically written off a huge chunk of the electorate such as minorities, single women, gay's, non religious folks, etc. They will need every single conservative voter they can find

People actually read this idiots brain dead columns.

left those men to the wolves the same as her man Clinton hobbled your lads in Somolia

salonpas619 reads

ush sure looks very Presidential. Never happened before to a U.S. President in office?

tongue . It was staged . Also Take a gaze at that small blonde lass who did the tossing . looks like she could be spinning stories for the one news cable

Posted By: Pimpathy
Yes, very Presidential.

....is because they so desperately wish that the Obama administration would have any scandal at all that they can bitch about. The best they've ever come up with is Benghazi. There were countless attacks on US embassies all across the Middle East when Dubya was in office. It barely made the news. The only reason why Benghazi did make the news is because our embassies stopped being attacked under the Obama administration.  

Oh, and then there is the supposed "cover up". The cover up of what exactly? Obama telling the American people the next day that it was a terrorist attack? The State Dept. not knowing precisely what happened because they had yet to piece everything together yet?  

The problem with the right wing shit heads who piss and moan about Benghazi is that they expect the State Dept to know the whole story 24 hours after the attack. Forgetting, of course, that their last President was so uninformed that the shit head invaded the wrong fucking country.  

This tells you all you need to know about these chicken hawk Republicans. A recent poll found that the more likely someone wanted to invade Ukraine, the less likely they were to be able to find Ukraine on a fucking map.

JackDunphy655 reads

They knew within minutes it was a terroristic act. The whole compound has TV cameras all over the fking place and they knew it terrorism by the mortars and RPG's.  

This wasn't the "bush" in Nam or some fking place way out in the desert where they had to rub two sticks together to start a fire to cook their food. This was a U.S. embassy with surveillance tech up the ass.  

And why did they let Rice go out 5 days after and say it was a spontaneous uprising if as you say Obama said it was terrorism the next day? They let Rice contradict Barry?

General Hamm informed Panetta the next day it was terrorism and Panetta then went and briefed Barry.  Panetta won't answer any questions about what he told Obama and when O'Reilly asked him on Super Bowl Sunday if Panetta told him it was a terroristic act, Obama would NOT answer the question. TWICE.

So get your lies straight and get back to me

....that it was a terrorist attack.  

There are reasons why the State Dept may not want to spill the beans to the public when they're in the middle of an investigation. For Republicans to piss and moan and bitch and whine about Benghazi, when they don't even REMEMBER the attack on the US embassy in Saudi Arabia when Dubya was in office speaks volumes.

Pimpathy583 reads

Posted By: willywonka4u
....is because they so desperately wish that the Obama administration would have any scandal at all that they can bitch about. The best they've ever come up with is Benghazi. There were countless attacks on US embassies all across the Middle East when Dubya was in office. It barely made the news. The only reason why Benghazi did make the news is because our embassies stopped being attacked under the Obama administration.  
   
 Oh, and then there is the supposed "cover up". The cover up of what exactly? Obama telling the American people the next day that it was a terrorist attack? The State Dept. not knowing precisely what happened because they had yet to piece everything together yet?  
   
 The problem with the right wing shit heads who piss and moan about Benghazi is that they expect the State Dept to know the whole story 24 hours after the attack. Forgetting, of course, that their last President was so uninformed that the shit head invaded the wrong fucking country.  
   
 This tells you all you need to know about these chicken hawk Republicans. A recent poll found that the more likely someone wanted to invade Ukraine, the less likely they were to be able to find Ukraine on a fucking map.

Register Now!