Benghazi-gate About To Explode

slurper_la

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Posts
5,879
Media
9
Likes
3,761
Points
333
Location
Los Angeles (California, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
There have been some 6 or more "investigations".
WHO orchestrated the investigation is far less important than the INTEGRITY of the investigation.

The fact that you only care about the political party involved shows how much of an obama-zombie you must be.

I'm glad we agree the republicans have no integrity
 

Perados

Superior Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Posts
11,002
Media
9
Likes
2,505
Points
333
Location
Germany
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Who do you think attacked and killed them?
The Islamic State that The Obama built...

Mmmmhh... if you think about, its the iraq war just as the cia plan, developed under the bush administration, to destable the middle east, for the isis success.
But yes, everyone here is an obama zombie

Your posts at the other threads show whoms child you are
 

BeefRockmore

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Posts
108
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
273
Gender
Male
Mmmmhh... if you think about, its the iraq war just as the cia plan, developed under the bush administration, to destable the middle east, for the isis success.
But yes, everyone here is an obama zombie

Your posts at the other threads show whoms child you are

Bush (43) is a progressive pile of sh!t too, but forewarned that if The Obama ran out of Iraq that the power vacuum would be devastating. The Obama did it anyway for his political purposes, AGAINST ALL advise.
I guess Bush took over Tunisia, Libya, Egypt & Syria too..?
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,686
Media
14
Likes
1,894
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Bush (43) is a progressive pile of sh!t too

Woah there!

Bush 43, Clinton and Obama are Neo-Liberals... they don't have a progressive bone in their bodies.

Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive... so was Harding & Woodrow Wilson. FDR became a progressive through a series of extenuating circumstances but started out as a liberal.

Truman was a liberal
Eisenhower was a liberal
JFK was a neo-liberal
Johnson was a liberal
Nixon was a conservative
Carter was a liberal
Reagan was a conservative
 

Calboner

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Posts
9,027
Media
29
Likes
7,873
Points
433
Location
USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
All you obama-zombies keep trying to dismiss Benghazi, but you fail to answer the questions;
why did The Obama try to cover it up; video bullsh!t?
where was The Obama when it was happening?
why was the ambassador even in a hostile area?
why do your "investigations" ignore the operatives that were actually there?
...
Who do you think attacked and killed them?
The Islamic State that The Obama built...
The Republican establishment, yes.
They are Democrats in reality... and therefore anti-American as well.
Bush (43) is a progressive pile of sh!t too,

Delusion levels rising in this thread.
 

YankeeJoe

Legendary Member
Joined
Oct 14, 2013
Posts
1,891
Media
0
Likes
1,071
Points
198
Woah there!

Bush 43, Clinton and Obama are Neo-Liberals... they don't have a progressive bone in their bodies.

Teddy Roosevelt was a progressive... so was Harding & Woodrow Wilson. FDR became a progressive through a series of extenuating circumstances but started out as a liberal.

Truman was a liberal
Eisenhower was a liberal
JFK was a neo-liberal
Johnson was a liberal
Nixon was a conservative
Carter was a liberal
Reagan was a conservative

Your rundown of the presidents/political philosophy is actually perceptive with the exception of Nixon. He was never a "conservative" as that term is commonly understood.
Yes, he employed the "southern strategy" to woo conservatives; Yes, he was an anti-communist Cold Warrior ( so was JFK); Yes, he talked a good "law and order" game; and yes, actual liberals absolutely loathed him.

But he actually implemented, signed into law, or occasionally proposed very liberal ideas and policies, such as the EPA.
And though he used occasionally raw language when talking about certain groups, Nixon, a Quaker from a family that had been active in the abolitionist movement, wasn't a racist in the style of Southern Democrats such as George Wallace or Robert Byrd. And though firebrand Pat Buchanan was a speechwriter and aide, he didn't support him when he ran for president, saying at the time, "Buchanan's gone over to the kooks..."
And Nixon was nothing if not politically astute, remarking about Republican politics, " You can't win without the conservatives--but you can't win with just the conservatives." In the Republican Party of the time, Nixon was in the middle--with the Nelson Rockefeller group on the left and the Goldwater/Reagan group on the right. Nixon was a "moderate" with both liberal and conservative tendencies--depending on the issue.
A venal politician who headed a failed administration? Yes. But a fascinating man.
 
Last edited:
D

deleted15807

Guest
Why does he keep calling him "The Obama"???

He's deriding both Obama and his supporters by implying he is not a person but some kind of deity. If I am wrong I welcome another explanation.
 

tripod

Legendary Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2006
Posts
6,686
Media
14
Likes
1,894
Points
333
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
But he actually implemented, signed into law, or occasionally proposed very liberal ideas and policies, such as the EPA.

EPA is Environmental Protection... you know, like conservation?

Conservation = conservative

By opposing the EPA, modern right wingers are actually participating in Neo-Liberalism.
 

slurper_la

Superior Member
Joined
Jul 6, 2008
Posts
5,879
Media
9
Likes
3,761
Points
333
Location
Los Angeles (California, United States)
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Your rundown of the presidents/political philosophy is actually perceptive with the exception of Nixon. He was never a "conservative" as that term is commonly understood.
Yes, he employed the "southern strategy" to woo conservatives; Yes, he was an anti-communist Cold Warrior ( so was JFK); Yes, he talked a good "law and order" game; and yes, actual liberals absolutely loathed him.

But he actually implemented, signed into law, or occasionally proposed very liberal ideas and policies, such as the EPA.
And though he used occasionally raw language when talking about certain groups, Nixon, a Quaker from a family that had been active in the abolitionist movement, wasn't a racist in the style of Southern Democrats such as George Wallace or Robert Byrd. And though firebrand Pat Buchanan was a speechwriter and aide, he didn't support him when he ran for president, saying at the time, "Buchanan's gone over to the kooks..."
And Nixon was nothing if not politically astute, remarking about Republican politics, " You can't win without the conservatives--but you can't win with just the conservatives." In the Republican Party of the time, Nixon was in the middle--with the Nelson Rockefeller group on the left and the Goldwater/Reagan group on the right. Nixon was a "moderate" with both liberal and conservative tendencies--depending on the issue.
A venal politician who headed a failed administration? Yes. But a fascinating man.

A post of yours I actually like and agree with.
 

BeefRockmore

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2008
Posts
108
Media
0
Likes
174
Points
273
Gender
Male
He's deriding both Obama and his supporters by implying he is not a person but some kind of deity. If I am wrong I welcome another explanation.

Generally right, but not to dehumanize ("not a person") rather shine light on the vehement & unhealthy reverence followers ("obama-zombies") have for "The Obama".
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
The Republican establishment, yes.
They are Democrats in reality... and therefore anti-American as well.

Wait so both republicans AND democrats are un-american? Then who is american? Are independents american? Cause i don't see them getting that kind of respect from either party.
 

vince

Legendary Member
Joined
May 13, 2007
Posts
8,271
Media
1
Likes
1,677
Points
333
Location
Canada
Sexuality
69% Straight, 31% Gay
Gender
Male
He's deriding both Obama and his supporters by implying he is not a person but some kind of deity. If I am wrong I welcome another explanation.
As my Dad often says, "That's just plain damn stupid."

Most of the fanboys of Obama circa 2008, have come back down to earth quite sometime ago and while he has his diehard supporters (like most politicians), most have ceased to be reverent.
 
D

deleted15807

Guest
As my Dad often says, "That's just plain damn stupid."

Most of the fanboys of Obama circa 2008, have come back down to earth quite sometime ago and while he has his diehard supporters (like most politicians), most have ceased to be reverent.

I was and am a supporter and I was not expecting a revolution. After all this is still America which is still by-and-large under the spell of trickle-down economics even after 30 years of failure.

And $1.5 million on the witch hunt but there is an unlimited budget when a witch hunt is under way. Hello Ken Starr!

Benghazi panel may cost $1.5 million this year
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
I was and am a supporter and I was not expecting a revolution. After all this is still America which is still by-and-large under the spell of trickle-down economics even after 30 years of failure.

And $1.5 million on the witch hunt but there is an unlimited budget when a witch hunt is under way. Hello Ken Starr!

Benghazi panel may cost $1.5 million this year

Guess i'd become the bad guy here if i uttered the words....wasteful spending.
 

Popyuu

Sexy Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Posts
2,223
Media
0
Likes
46
Points
83
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
When the target is a democrat there is NO such thing as wasteful spending. I'm old enough to remember the Clinton witchhunt known as Whitewater.

Independent probes of Clinton Administration cost nearly $80 million

And what did the public get for that? Nada. Zilch. Some minor tier characters.

And in the words of a few posters. I guess they just trying to....(wait for it) hang him. Or no wait....lynch him. I guess republicans were at the time...acting like... a mob or...thugs. Soo much money...wasted. And....by government officials no less.
 

Calboner

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 16, 2007
Posts
9,027
Media
29
Likes
7,873
Points
433
Location
USA
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Male
Louie Gohmert is now offering a fantasy explanation of the non-existence of evidence of his fantasy conspiracy.

“This administration knows that General Petraeus has information that would virtually destroy any credibility that the administration might still have nationally and internationally, so what else would this administration do but leave over his head for a year and a half the threat, ‘We’re going to prosecute you so you better keep your mouth shut.’ . . . So if you wonder why General Petraeus has not come out in the last year in a half and said, ‘No those weren’t our talking points, somebody that created them needs to be prosecuted, it was a fraud on the American people,’ he’s not going to say that; he’s got this administration hanging a prosecution over his head. ”

Louie Gohmert: Obama Is Blackmailing Petraeus Over Benghazi | Crooks and Liars