ExiledInIllinois Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Old news... Did you not read the memo... Mittens wants to change gears and get back to talking about the economy. LoL...
B-Man Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Old news... Did you not read the memo... Mittens wants to change gears and get back to talking about the economy. LoL... Laughable response Deflection from an Obama embarrassment, but blamed on the GOP........................weak. .
DC Tom Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 I was being facitious in my earlier post about how this was a failure of George W Bush. I also underestimated the lemmings like you to try to reflect the Libya/Cairo Embassy stuff back on Bush But ok, I'll play along Let's assume that Bush had 4 weeks notice of the 9/11 attack by Al'Qaeda Did he know the attacks would occur on September 11th? Did he know the attacks would occur in NYC and DC? Did he know hijackers would crash planes into the WTC and Pentagon? So Bush knew WHO, but not WHAT, WHERE, WHEN, and HOW The Embassy attacks on the other hand, Obama knew that Al'Queada was planning an attack on a US Embassy So Obama knew WHO, WHAT(Embassy Attack), WHERE (US Embassy in the Middle East), WHEN (Around Sept 11th Anivversary), but not HOW So yeah, blow it all back on Bush Your qualifications of "where, and when" are inconsistent between Bush and Obama (technically, if you're as vague about where and when for Bush as you were for Obama, Bush did "know".) Likewise, your qualification of "what" is vague for Obama, considering how many embassies AND CONSULATES (you unbelievable morons) the US has in the Middle East...just less vague than Bush's knowledge. Like I said...you're all deranged.
3rdnlng Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Your qualifications of "where, and when" are inconsistent between Bush and Obama (technically, if you're as vague about where and when for Bush as you were for Obama, Bush did "know".) Likewise, your qualification of "what" is vague for Obama, considering how many embassies AND CONSULATES (you unbelievable morons) the US has in the Middle East...just less vague than Bush's knowledge. Like I said...you're all deranged. WHEN--- 9-11 seems like a good bet. WHERE---"By executive fiat, all embassies, consulates and U.S. government offices are hereby put on full alert for the time period two days prior and two days after 9-11." Although clueless, Obama should have had a clue. 9-11, Islamic terrorism and our offices in foreign countries seem to all tie together. 9-11 had no significance to Bush prior to 9-11-2001. Targets could have been anything and anywhere. Tom, I expected more critical thinking from you.
/dev/null Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Like I said...you're all deranged. And you're an idiot, you @#$%'ing moranic Thursday
B-Man Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 It will be interesting to see how this actually shakes out. My guess would be that the 'media' will keep it supressed enough that it won't be a major issue. It it did become one, since the only tactic Mr. Obama has known throughout his life, is to blame someone else and throw them under the bus. The State Dpt. is run by Hillary......................and she won't go that route. .
B-Man Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 Political Science -- Randy Newman -- 1972 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Du3WhHrrNgs "We give them money But are they grateful? No they’re spiteful And they’re hateful. They don’t respect us so let’s surprise them; We’ll drop the big one and pulverize them."
Cinga Posted September 14, 2012 Posted September 14, 2012 (edited) It will be interesting to see how this actually shakes out. My guess would be that the 'media' will keep it supressed enough that it won't be a major issue. It it did become one, since the only tactic Mr. Obama has known throughout his life, is to blame someone else and throw them under the bus. The State Dpt. is run by Hillary......................and she won't go that route. . Don't be silly.... Of course PBO would try to throw Hill under the bus to save his sorry a55... But to her credit, she actually spoke out in favor of the Constitutional right of free speech, while the WH is on the phone to youtube to try to pressure them to remove the video... I may think she's a puts, but she's a smart one, and can read the writing on the wall... Thing is... It ain't just the video, though, that's what the media is blaming... Think about it... It's been out since June, why protest it in September?? Aren't they a little late to the party? Edited September 14, 2012 by Cinga
ExiledInIllinois Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 Laughable response Deflection from an Obama embarrassment, but blamed on the GOP........................weak. . Sorry to break it to you... It is the truth. Mittens wants to talk about the economy.
dayman Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 (edited) Like I said...you're all deranged. Nobody is deranged Tom. It's all apart of the plan, the blame game. Idiots on the left still fixate on Bush and 911. Now idiots on the right are going to try and make every retarded argument they can that somehow this was directly on Obama (and perhaps that Mitt would have "stopped" it). There is no such thing as "it's a big world and sometimes a few crazy people can cause chaos." As with the economy. Small business owners built their business God damnit! Now they're entitled to a good economy to reap benefits off of and God damnit it's Obama's fault we aren't gangbusters! B/c if it weren't for the debt we'd be booming! So let's cut taxes! Liberal response: No the economy sucked under Bush! Republicans destroy the economy! No.."the economy is sometimes just going to suck...and now is one of those times you idiot." The economy is in the President's control. Every idiot on earth can be stopped by the President. Etc.... Edited September 15, 2012 by TheNewBills
IDBillzFan Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 Sorry to break it to you... It is the truth. Mittens wants to talk about the economy. At least someone does without it cutting into Vegas, Letterman, Jayz, Beyonce, Pimpwith the Limp time.
Oxrock Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 (edited) Nobody is deranged Tom. It's all apart of the plan, the blame game. Idiots on the left still fixate on Bush and 911. Now idiots on the right are going to try and make every retarded argument they can that somehow this was directly on Obama (and perhaps that Mitt would have "stopped" it). There is no such thing as "it's a big world and sometimes a few crazy people can cause chaos." As with the economy. Small business owners built their business God damnit! Now they're entitled to a good economy to reap benefits off of and God damnit it's Obama's fault we aren't gangbusters! B/c if it weren't for the debt we'd be booming! So let's cut taxes! Liberal response: No the economy sucked under Bush! Republicans destroy the economy! No.."the economy is sometimes just going to suck...and now is one of those times you idiot." The economy is in the President's control. Every idiot on earth can be stopped by the President. Etc.... Just a few A Map of Muslim Protest Oh, you're gonna need a bigger map! Edited September 15, 2012 by Oxrock
dayman Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 Just a few A Map of Muslim Protest Oh, you're gonna need a bigger map! I think you are making my point for me. Unless we're now adding preventing Muslims from becoming offended to POTUS duty
Oxrock Posted September 15, 2012 Posted September 15, 2012 (edited) I think you are making my point for me. Unless we're now adding preventing Muslims from becoming offended to POTUS duty Click on the bigger map. It's growing. I'm not sure what your point was. I just found an opening with the bold part of your post to emphasize it's not a "Few" crazies. After re-reading your post, I think you are wrong. The President holds great influence of the mood of the people here at home in regards to the economy (in regards to policy proposals and regulatory enforcement). And a foreign policy of apology while simultaneously bragging in public about "kill lists" and "Osama Bin Ladin is dead! General Motors is alive!" is like dipping his finger in salt then pushing it into the open wounds of suffering at the hands of the radical islamist clerics. Edited September 15, 2012 by Oxrock
Nanker Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 (edited) You mean Joe's message of "Courage, Compassion, and a Spine of Steel" didn't play well in Al Qaida's headquarters? Who'd a thunk that on just another day in an early autumn month that Al Qaida would want to raise a ruckus over the murder of their messianic leader earlier that same year? I mean seriously. I can see how the State Department wouldn't put two and two together. They're running the rose colored glasses policy of peaceful coexistence and worldwide bliss since BO brought down the level of Islamic animosity towards the US. They nearly love us now. Of course BO himself is far too busy napping - well sleeping really, to do much about things that don't interest him much at all. Though he's probably issued an executive order for American embassies to draw the curtains and have everyone stay inside on September 11, 2013. THAT's leadership spelled with a capital C. With the State Department in check, and BO himself working hard on his travel plans and campaign fund raising, that left Joe in charge. But we know and making the premium payments on Obama's life insurance policy. But hey, at least the Press has BO's back and they know who the real threat to America is - Romney. Edited September 16, 2012 by Nanker
Rob's House Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 What did he know and when did he know it?
Doc Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 You mean Joe's message of "Courage, Compassion, and a Spine of Steel" didn't play well in Al Qaida's headquarters? Who'd a thunk that on just another day in an early autumn month that Al Qaida would want to raise a ruckus over the murder of their messianic leader earlier that same year? I mean seriously. I can see how the State Department wouldn't put two and two together. They're running the rose colored glasses policy of peaceful coexistence and worldwide bliss since BO brought down the level of Islamic animosity towards the US burying their heads in the sand (or if you prefer, up their asses) and imploring other countries to not start **** until after the elections. They nearly love us now. Of course BO himself is far too busy napping - well sleeping really, to do much about things that don't interest him much at all. Though he's probably issued an executive order for American embassies to draw the curtains and have everyone stay inside on September 11, 2013. THAT's leadership spelled with a capital C. With the State Department in check, and BO himself working hard on his travel plans and campaign fund raising, that left Joe in charge. But we know and making the premium payments on Obama's life insurance policy. But hey, at least the Press has BO's back and they know who the real threat to America is - Romney. Fixed it for you.
Koko78 Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 Ambassador Susan Rice: Libya Attack Not Premeditated... "Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous - not a premeditated - response to what had transpired in Cairo," Rice told me this morning on "This Week." ... Rice's account directly contradicts that of Libyan President Mohamed Magariaf, who said this weekend that the attack was premeditated by individuals from outside Libya. ... ..."The security personnel that the State Department thought were required were in place… It obviously didn't prove sufficient to the - the nature of the attack and sufficient in that - in that moment." ... http://news.yahoo.com/ambassador-susan-rice-libya-attack-not-premeditated-141127762--abc-news-politics.html So they had a "substantial security presence" that was not adequate and were completely caught off guard by an "unplanned" attack by "protesters" using heavy weapons that just happened to coincidentally occur where the Ambassador was, catching him in an ambush that wasn't premeditated. But hey, at least Obama is committed to the security of his diplomats. They did reinforce the embassy in Tripoli following the 'unplanned protest'.
DC Tom Posted September 16, 2012 Posted September 16, 2012 http://news.yahoo.co...s-politics.html So they had a "substantial security presence" that was not adequate and were completely caught off guard by an "unplanned" attack by "protesters" using heavy weapons that just happened to coincidentally occur where the Ambassador was, catching him in an ambush that wasn't premeditated. But hey, at least Obama is committed to the security of his diplomats. They did reinforce the embassy in Tripoli following the 'unplanned protest'. ...prompting Obama to apologize to al Qaeda for falsely blaming them...
Recommended Posts