Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
You wrote all that and state it as "fact" yet you link nothing.
And you wonder why you have what, 200 rep points?
I don't need links to prove that the liberals here on CD will defend Obama no matter how bad things get or how obvious they are. My 600~ rep points also have nothing to do with the truth still being the truth.
My track record of voting (both republican and democrat) puts me socially liberal but fiscal conservative. I really say. . .from my perspective
Benghazi - eh, **** in bad places happen. From what i've seen, this isn't worse than them multiple similar events in previous years. The only thing different is the SPIN. Just not impressed
IRS Scandal - yeah, targeting specific groups seems wrong. Yet, so far no one has shown me anyone wrongged. Did Tea Party = decline? or did they just group people to be more effective and it turned out to be stupid
both instances I don't see an administration that far to blame
and both instances are nothing compared to the previous administration virtually ignoring 9/11 warning signs so they could focus on Iraq
SPIN is SPIN. if there is meat, I'm sure we will find out soon about the IRS. Bengazi has been picked clean
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheMoreYouKnow
1)
So liberals, please stop trying to brush these 2 instances under the carpet while spouting ignorance and lies. The facts are coming to light and will continue to come out.
I don't need links to prove that the liberals here on CD will defend Obama no matter how bad things get or how obvious they are. My 600~ rep points also have nothing to do with the truth still being the truth.
Republicans: anything Obama says is evil; anyone who defends is stupid
Democrats: anything republicans says is stupid; anyone who defends is evil
The issue is this, claiming that it was attached to a video gives motive and sympathy to the terrorists and their actions was "right" in someway. The issue is, until we had all the facts in a row, we shouldn't call it anything that it wasn't which was a terrorist attack. The intel that we had from the attack varied if it was protests or a random act and the politicians and the media ran with both stories before facts were checked because we have to beat out someone else who has information coming in rather than giving the truth.
The truth is, in the end the video was no longer linked to this specific act of terror within a few weeks and was only admonished by the administration AFTER the election cycle. Hell, when Romney brought it up during the town hall debate he got chewed up even when Obama DID call it an act of terror the first day but then backpedaled for the next week or so. This is what I am annoyed with. You have a president that wants to give the public transparency as a campaign promise that we ran on and then when he should show transparency, he balks. And people wondered why I couldn't trust Obama enough to vote for him once, let alone twice.
Is that the best they got? After nine congressional investigations, the best they've got is something they arev"annoyed" about -- no misappropriatios, no crimes and no misdeeds. Your annoyance is not a high crime nor misdemeanor.
Which diplomats are you talking about specifically?
Crickets.
Right now gtc08 is likely looking up the propaganda piece that he read on Mother Jones or heard on MSNBC and wondering why he can't find any valid information.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.