Return to the Hot Topics Forum

 o
Benghazi Gate

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on
Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 8:49

Theories?

Since we know Eric Holder knew back in the summer of the Petraeus Affair, and several sources have said that Petraeus knew others knew about it, Petraeus' appearance on September 14 where he bolstered the Administration's obvious lies about the 9-11 terrorism massacre of our citizens being a result of a few people being upset over viewing a little known video made months ago in the United States--methinks the General was trying to save his career.

He probably would have had it not been for Miss Diplomatic Protection going to the FBI to rat him out and his paramour.

Blackmail.

It ain't pretty.

The Barack Obama Administration quelled this story until after the election, just like releasing the increased food stamp numbers after the election when it usually released the end of the month before, or the first few days of the month.

You have to hand it to Obama when it comes to Chicago Style Politics and sticking it to the American Public when it comes to transparency and doing the right thing vs. saving your own political hide.

They have that down to a science.

Four dead Americans and we have Obama and his administration acting like it is no big deal and still, two months later, no real answers, only a lot more questions.

Some of us care about why the Americans were killed when they didn't have to be.


Follow-Up Postings:

 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Obama Blames Benghazi On Video Six Times At United Nations Speech On October 25th But Does Not Mention Terrorism.

This would be my starting point. Who had the big idea of blaming this on a video when everyone already knew it was a terrorist attack? And the questions that follow that can make more sense.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

This may be his second term scandal that buries him and keeps him from getting anything done as president. At least he doesn't have to worry about a three year campaign.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I was wondering how long it would be to MRS K first Benghazi post I noticed once we mentioned Eric cantor over on the other post the topic went to firemen calendars. OK we'll see where it goes.!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

It has just been announced that Petraus will voluntarily testify at the Benghazi hearings.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 9:19

"Theories?"

Nah, more akin to "beliefs"...or wishful thinking journalism for certain outlets.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Well said Demi, Thank you.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The Barack Obama Administration quelled this story until after the election,

Why would Petraeus schtooping a mistress have changed the election in any way? Remember Petraeus is a republican - in fact, the great hope of the republicans to run for president.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The Barack Obama Administration quelled this story until after the election, just like releasing the increased food stamp numbers after the election when it usually released the end of the month before, or the first few days of the month.

What is the food stamp story about?

You have to hand it to Obama when it comes to Chicago Style Politics

What does Chicago Style mean to you?

I will hold judgement on Benghazi since it is being investigated. I have a problem accusing anyone without facts. Some may need to do so but I am find with whatever comes from the Republican controlled investigation.....House Oversight Committee Chairman Darrell Issa (R-CA


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

How does Eric Cantor knowing about this and saying nothing fit into the theory?

I also find it exceedingly curious that NO senior Republicans, including the Romney campaign, made an issue of Benghazi in the latter stages of the election. Even Issa basically said nothing. Perhaps they know facts not currently in the public domain.

What I do believe is that no matter what comes out of the investigations there will be those who will hold on to their conspiracy theories because they need to have some reason to believe the President is Anti American.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The "outrage" is being actively and continuously encouraged (still) by Fox News. Fox News and its listeners are the only ones convinced that they have found Obama's "watergate" and they are panting to lunge forward and attack!

I personally think Fox is making a big deal of Benghazi because it wants people to forget how totally WRONG it was about everything it predicted about the Romney "landslide" (that never happened). Fox has a lot of mud on its face right now, so you faithful ones better start yelling "fire" while pointing in another direction to get attention off of Fox's inadequacies as a truth-telling source.

As chase noted, Republican officials are not taking up the hue and cry. Wonder what they know that keeps them on the sidelines, uninvolved? Maybe we should all shut up while we wait to find out why the Republican officials do not want to make a big deal out of this.

Many of us have questions, but we are not jumping up and down with impatience to get on with the burning. We will wait until any or all of the investigations--some headed by Obama-haters, so surely you can trust them!--can deliver some facts on which to base some sound conclusions. As far as I know, there are about 4 official investigations going on right now. Unfortunately for Fox News, they are not producing heart-pounding headlines, so not helpful to the Fox News agenda.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

They all backed off and left Fox to play the game of (can you folks imagine what that means)
Fox reporters say a line a snippet & ask the audience to imagine, (gee whats that all about) then ask a question ask the audience to imagine.
Now that they have herded you into imaginary land we will eventually hear which crud's did what. I'm certain like everything else on here whats imagined will be more important that what is so!

I just can['t live another moment till I, I, I, know Mr Cantors..................................................
real story!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

That's the liberal line, "it's all Fox's doing."

Pretty pathetic.

Well, Kate, my concern is from what I have READ from sources other than Fox news and I haven't watched Fox news in a long time, or any television news.

This is REAL.

REAL people are dead and REAL LIES have been told by the Obama Administration.

They've been caught with their pants down the same way that David Petraeus has and FOUR AMERICANS are dead and did not have to be.

The citizens of this country deserve answers, not more lies, not more stonewalling and silence--from everyone involved.

Your obsession with Fox news has nothing at all to do with the fact that FOUR AMERICANS ARE DEAD and we have no answers, only lies and silence.

If this is what Fox is reporting on this subject, then good for them.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Speculation often breeds outrage, I know... but I'd rather wait until all the facts are in before drawing conclusions. Until then, it's all nothing more than grasping at straws, adding fuel to the can from which many sniff.

Patience is a wonderful thing, as are facts... real ones.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Yea, well two months of lies and stonewalling is more than enough patience, especially with the intentional lies and different stories on the table.

Much less four dead people.

*

Funny, I don't see the same calls for "patience" when a scandal hits Republicans.

OR the silence.

It is deafening.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Interesting how your "independent" views are phrased exactly as Fox News phrases them.

Are we here to talk just about you and your views, or is Benghazi (about which there is more than one view) the topic? Just want to be clear.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Benghazi conspiracies -- the new birther movement.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Let's just hope that journalists are as vigilante about this as they were about the Valerie Plame affair. And rightly so.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by dublinbay z6 KS (My Page) on
Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 10:12

Interesting how your "independent" views are phrased exactly as Fox News phrases them.

Are we here to talk just about you and your views, or is Benghazi (about which there is more than one view) the topic? Just want to be clear.

Kate

*

Can't stop posting insinuations that I am lying, huh?

I asked for input at the beginning of the thread.

So quite obviously this thread is not about me, however, your comments are about me and not what you think happened.

That alone tells me a LOT, doesn't it?

Talk about Demi and jump all over Demi and "accuse of" (gasp!) of watching Fox news when I don't and even if I did SO WHAT?

Anything but discuss the inconsistencies, the lies, and the grisly deaths of our public servants that occurred when Obama had a HEADS UP it was likely to happen, with people begging for help and no help came, except those that died trying to help, against orders to help?

You don't find this outrageous, Kate?
You would rather argue with me about what television of watch, Kate?

There are a lot of news sources for conservatives other than Fox news. I avail myself of them.

But go ahead and make your personal comments about me, that's the only defense you've got of this mess is to try to deflect from the debacle and attack the messenger and chastise the messenger for watching a news channel she does not watch.

DO you realize how ridiculous that is?

In the meantime, FOUR DEAD AMERICANS, Obama going on television and to the UN and repeatedly stating this massacre was caused from a ruckus over an obscure video, and we have PROOF he knew and they all knew it was a terrorist attack.

But oh, we can't have that right before an election with "Bin Laden Dead and Al Queda on it's heels," now can we?

Poor people begging for help and they were ignored so as not to have a terrorist attack in 9-11 on Obama's watch if he could attribute it to something else.

But keep parroting the talking points about Fox News and what I watch, Kate--it shows us just how worried and scared Democrats are that this will be only the beginning of a disastrous second term for Hope and Change.

I am ashamed of my country for this.
Now, Michelle and I have even more in common.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I'll ask again. Why didn't Cantor speak up about what he knew? Why did the Republicans not make anything of this during the election, especially ISSA ?

There are reasons. I don't know what they are but if they had a smoking gun or verifiable information that the President deliberately lied I'm sure they would have used it.

Why is it that conservatives believe the Republican investigative committees are covering up the truth?

There was so much "information" out there about Benghazi that was out and out lies of the worse type and yet it still doesn't give some pause. The truth will out unless of course Issa is part of the cover up.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

We'll never know about the real story behind the General's abrupt resignation, reputably reluctant departure. Did the General try to play political games with the situation in order to damage this Presidency and favor Congressional allies on the Republican side?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Regarding Cantor and Issa--just more questions and we deserve answers.

But I'm way more interested in why Obama lied, what Petraeus knew and why he said what he did September 14, what Hilary knew and when she knew and why she pushed the "video" theory, and why those people were intentionally left to be slaughtered when the Obama Administration had HEADS UP that terrorist attacks were likely, why on 9-11 they let it happen, had no viable contingency plan or any contingency plan when it did, and let those poor public servants scream and beg for help and didn't get it to them, and in fact told others NOT to go help them.

Then LIED about the entire debacle.

*

But by all means you guys go ahead and get upset about Cantor and Issa.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The lie being that out of the 50+ protests, many violent and deadly, around the world about the film, the attack on the consulate that occurred during that same time period was initially considered a similar protest. When more information became available, they realized it was a military-style attack, which - these days if anybody ever anywhere attacks an American, its TERRORISM!!!!.

And from there, we have had a political circus - pushed, pulled, stretched, tugged, blown up, lied about, exaggerated, all kinds of garbage dumped, led by the far right. Very similar to Fast And Furious. Which, when the official, congressional inquiry finally made their report, exonerated the President and Holder, and all that garbage died down.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You can speculate all you want. Smarter to wait until after the investigation is finished. Then you might have something to legitimately complain about. Until then.............


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

This isn't fast and furious, David.

Stupid cartoons making fun of people with questions do not answer the questions and are disrespectful to the dead in my opinion, as well as citizens who want and deserve answers for this nasty piece of history.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I must be missing huge pieces of verifiable facts because I have not heard anything to suggest that the President or Petraeus lied.

You may want to dismiss the Republican reaction to this but it is a key piece of the puzzle and I suspect it's becasue they know that the President did not lie.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

That's what the thread is about--speculation.

IF you don't want to speculate, Ann, don't.

I seem to recall a lot of threads about speculation here--lately, numerous threads speculating about Mitt Romney's taxes.

I didn't see anyone refusing to discuss "speculation" on those subjects.

In fact, Romney was called a cheat, tax dodger, and all sorts of speculation about what was on his taxes, all without any evidence.

But that's okay, isn't it?

What hypocrisy!

I can smell the fear.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

On the anniversary, 9-11, there were world-wide protests against America for the anti-Muslim video, protests coinciding to a truly symbolic date for Islamic extremists. The Ambassador and party had left the safety of the American Embassy against protocol during this time of crisis. There must have been something to see in Benghazi to bring these diplomats and CIA agents to that troubled city.

Let's allow the investigations to proceed before condemning the Administration. I place the initial blame on the damn fool Ambassador for making the trip.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

"I can smell the fear."

About what? Do you really believe this will bring the Presidency down?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Stupid cartoons making fun of people with questions do not answer the questions and are disrespectful to the dead in my opinion, as well as citizens who want and deserve answers for this nasty piece of history.

I'm just curious - when you drag out this pseudo-scandal garbage from FOX and ilk, do you ever realize how you're getting played?

Lets do a little deconstruction here: "do not answer questions"

Thats your classic Glenn Beck garbage. Make some ridiculous, absurd accusation, and then because you don't get an answer, run with the not getting an answer.

as well as citizens who want and deserve answers for this nasty piece of history.

Why not let the congress do their inquiry, present their results? And then comment?

So as far as I can tell, the wingnut explanation of what went on in Benghazi was a well-signaled, well-known, everybody warned attack was coming at the consulate. Desperate security guards begged, pleaded, to protect the ambassador but were refused by a cold hearted Clinton. The evening of the attack, Obama was getting a lap dance by Beyonce at a fund raiser, while watching the whole thing go down on a megatron screen what with all the security cameras showing the attack in realtime, laughing and pocketing campaign money. Brave generals wanted to rescue the Ambassador but Obama personally told them to stand down. Then the Ambassador was raped, drug through the streets. And the reason all this happened is because Obama is a secret mooslim who wants to destroy America.

Have I got that right? Or are you going to come back with the transparently idiotic, Glenn Beck "unanswered questions" reply.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Hey, Dave you liberal, when are you going to stop beating your wife?

No answer, eh? What more are you trying to hide, you fiend!?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

But I'm way more interested in why Obama lied

Just speculating but I think......That is the problem. WAY more interested in Obama and it has nothing to do with the deaths.

but not WAY interested....

Regarding Cantor and Issa--just more questions and we deserve answers.

If someone is interested in the tragedy I would be WAY interested hear the TRUTH from all. But that is not the interest or the reason.

When this was not used by Romney or Issa during the last weeks of the campaign I knew there was nothing they could use.

It is going to be interesting to see what happens to those that want so desperately for it to be an Obama Bendhazi Gate. I guess they will fall back on looking for the President's birth certificate.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

At the link is a full description of what we now know actually happened and what is now going on. I know its wiki, but read it yourself and draw your own conclusions, I found it very helpful.

Just to make it clear, I fully support the congressional/CIA inquiry into what happened, with the hopeful result that their findings will lead to better security precautions in the future.

What I despise is the hyperbolic politicization, and the very likely unintended consequences on our diplomatic relations around the world.

Here is a link that might be useful: link


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Petraeus is going to testify before our electeds. Very good news.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Anyone see the little snippet of his interview on CBS on Sept. 12, that ended up on the cutting room floor?

chase, go to any news organization and you will find that none disagree that Obama lied to the American public. There is already too much evidence that proves this was never about a video.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Thanks,david, the Wiki account was helpful.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Mrs there is a very big difference between telling the American people what you know,when you it and lying. Lying is deliberately saying something you know to be untrue. I believe, as do most, that the President spoke based on the information provided him

Even Condi Rice, a woman you admire, says that she does not believe the deaths were attributable to a break down in protocol and she also said that there is often conflicting and inaccurate information during a crisis.

Let the facts unfold.....


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I find it sad how many learn what to think and what to feel because of a television station which makes money by actively misleading them.
It distorts logic, because everything is reduced to outrage. It's astounding how many people like their daily fix of anger, outrage and a sense of victimhood, all readily supplied by their favourite entertainment news source.
But what does it say about these people who are constantly searching for a cause for their anger and outrage? Such a giant waste of time and energy, allowing the media to grind your gears in this way.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I can smell the fear.

Nah, that was the chili you had last night.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

  • Posted by kwoods Cold z7 Long Is (My Page) on
    Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 11:51

I'm very curious to know why there was a CIA nest in Benghazi and what they were up to. Why the specific personnel that were there were there. I do think Petraeus is being set up as some kind of fall guy. I also think that, like much of what our intelligence forces are up to, we'll never really know the whole story. What happened, regardless of why, is a tragedy. Bottom line, they got killed doing their job and knowing full well what a dangerous job it was.

What amuses me is that there have been so many similar instances of adventurism in the past and usually the roles are reversed. Republicans calling for an investigation into our national intelligence forces? I love it!

I know, I know "Bush, Bush, Bush..." but you gotta admit, the dirt he had the CIA doing was pretty nasty... all in the name of fighting "terr" though.

Were Obama Bush, wouldn't he just claim what was going on in Benghazi was a matter of national security, fighting "terr", and squash it?.... followed by Republicans all nodding in unison zombie-style.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I think Demi's first word of her OP was stunning in its ideologically driven simplicity:

THEORIES?

I'm putting my scientist's cap on for this one. Theories are based on observable facts proven through testing to be more than hypothetically true but still lacking additional testing and proving. Perhaps, then, the OP should start with:

HYPOTHESES?

Better than RUMORS, HUNCHES, you get the idea.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Does anyone think these questions shouldn't be answered?

Here is a link that might be useful: questions


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Mrs, everyone agrees they should be asked. Are you saying Issa is covering up and not asking, or going to ask,those questions?

It's not about asking the questions it's about waiting for the answers


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by demifloyd 8 (My Page) on Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 8:49

Some of us care about why the Americans were killed when they didn't have to be.
**********************************************************

We sure do!

Thanks to Dubya THOUSANDS have been killed. We had no business going into the MidEast the way we did.

The ramification of this Dubya war are HUGE, and will be LONG LASTING....for generations. The poor military families hurting as they lost loved ones. People are coming back mamed, psychologically messed up, and suffering.

Oh don't forget the TAXPAYERS who will have to pay for generations for their health and wellbeing, and disability. They are in the 47%. The VA disability is going through the roof, and will continue. Wait until they all come home. There are pension benefits, disability benefits, spouse benefits... I'm glad to do it. BUT, it peeves me when Rep voters just think for TODAY and don't see the BIG picture. WARS have l-o-n-g consequences afterwards. Whose fault will the huge taxes be, the Dems, or the Reps? Let's put the blame where it belongs;the war mongers-the REPUBLICANS!!!!

Benghazi is just one tiny bit of the BEES NEST that have occupied many regions in the MidEast and are killing our men and women.

I'm no Patreus (lol) but common sense tells me that the embassy in Benghazi had been watched and the terrorists found a weak spot, and wanted to show the US that they still exist. Duh! No conspiracy theory.
It was a tragedy and the US must increase security. The Reps better not vote against spending money there....


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 22 (UPI) -- The number of U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan has more than doubled since President Obama took office, The New York Times reports.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

My theory is that Obama will remain President for FOUR MORE YEARS!


-Ron-


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Yup - 32 Americans at a CIA complex, evacuated.

Wonder what they were doing there.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 12:35

KABUL, Afghanistan, Aug. 22 (UPI) -- The number of U.S. soldiers killed in Afghanistan has more than doubled since President Obama took office, The New York Times reports.
****************************************************
MidEast people are getting angrier by the minute. They don't want us there. The deaths likely will escalate. It's time to pull out. They can take care of their own civil war. Unfortunately, WE made the situation worse by going in without a GOOD EXIT strategy.

Don't you remember from your History class that PARTYZANTS in Europe during the WWII were escalating the occupier deaths the longer they stayed in their country? The partyzants (i.e. the negative Al Quada in this situation) had more time to organize and figure out how to kill the occupiers (Germans). Haven't we learned ANYTHING from History? Why are most Reps knee-jerk reactors over and over, but expect different results?

For other posters-the 47% will likely become over 50%, as the numbers of disabeled veterans grow...and our grandchildren will be paying for this. Gotta love the Reps.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi & Mrs. K: your outrage appears to be politically motivated. The deaths of anyone in the mid-east conflicts is tragic. But while you focus on 4 deaths in Libya & bring up the number of US soldiers who've died in Afganistan, I see no mention of the 4,000 plus who died in Iraq as a result of the lies and deceptions committed by Bush, Cheney et al. Where is your outrage over those deaths?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Bothell, I know that I have spoken my outrage over the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want all of our soldiers home yesterday.

Does that mean that the deaths of four Americans in Libya, that should not have happened, are unimportant? Are you outraged over the deaths of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you hold Obama accountable for those who have died under his command as well? You wouldn't have voted for Bush/Cheney would you? Did you vote for Obama?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

d by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 14:49

Bothell, I know that I have spoken my outrage over the deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan. I want all of our soldiers home yesterday.
Does that mean that the deaths of four Americans in Libya, that should not have happened, are unimportant? Are you outraged over the deaths of soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan? Do you hold Obama accountable for those who have died under his command as well? You wouldn't have voted for Bush/Cheney would you? Did you vote for Obama?
****************************************
The death of the 4 in Benghazi is tragic, BUT the thousands who lost their lives as a result of BUSH starting the war is just plain sick.

As I said in my previous posts,the FUTURE ramifications are uncontrollable, expensive and a BURDEN to those who didn't want the war.

Obama is cleaning up a war that he never started. Under the circumstances, I DO believe that he is doing the best that can be done. I don't see Obama as perfect, but I do see him as a thoughtful, steady leader.

Once you are thrown into a MINED field, you have to tread slowly and carefully.

If all you Reps are so interested in the MidEast, why don't YOU go down there and show Obama how its done, eh?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Mrs. K. Notto just explained it succinctly and better than I could.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Stop it!...It's Bush's fault!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

What I would like to know is what one thing has to do with the other. Had the Ambassador been sending communications to Bush, telling him that they needed more security? When they came under attack, was Bush sitting in the situation room? Did Bush go before the American people and claim it was a video that was the cause? Blame Bush for what Bush did or didn't do as president. Obama is president now, he has to answer for his own actions.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by mrskjun 9 (My Page) on Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 15:24

What I would like to know is what one thing has to do with the other. Had the Ambassador been sending communications to Bush, telling him that they needed more security? When they came under attack, was Bush sitting in the situation room? Did Bush go before the American people and claim it was a video that was the cause? Blame Bush for what Bush did or didn't do as president. Obama is president now, he has to answer for his own actions.
******************************************************

YESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!
By further implications of the war!

BTW- TOO much Fox news, and obssessions with "scandals"....


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

President tell Graham & McCain back off Rice!
How many more posts do yah think we can get out of this!

Here is a link that might be useful: Video


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

those poor public servants scream and beg for help and didn't get it to them, and in fact told others NOT to go help them.

I'm on my phone and cannot search for it now but...

hasn't this BS about the admin told help to not go been proven wrong? Of course, I'm sure Fox didn't report that part do I guess we cannot expect the bubble dwellers to know that.

You may smell fear but it's certainly not coming from the liberals.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

It has been established that no one was told to "stand down"--as in, do not help anyone who needs help in Benghazi.

We've gone over all this over and over again--several older threads--like 2 weeks ago or so? Go there and get the updated information. I'm not going to repeat it all again here.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Thanks Kate. Same old same old around here. Keep repeating things that have been proven false. Some call THAT lying.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

President tell Graham & McCain back off Rice!

I was so proud. McCain will never forget he lost. What he said today was nasty.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Tell those two old white men their time in the sun is over. President Obama was forceful today in defending Susan Rice and set the tone...nobody is going to mess with him now. They can't deny him a third term.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

some folks desperately need this to be their shining hope for a little post election feel good or whatever that emotion is they experience around this kind of stuff (twisted)


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The election is over mrsk, demi and brushwork.
You lost.
The feigned outrage over the Benghazi attack that killed 4 is laughable coming from those who never questioned what Bush knew and when he knew it prior to 9/11 when 3,000 Americans died and our Trade Towers were taken down along with four commercial airplanes.

And where were you 3 Obama haters when Gadaffi was threatening to go door to door in Benghazi to slaughter the opposition?
Yup, you were questioning Obama then as well. The President ended up saving countless lives and eventually created helped the resistance topple the terrorist leader.

The fact that you hear something on Fox means nothing. Fox News has become a joke. Don't make yourself part of that joke.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by demifloyd 8
There are a lot of news sources for conservatives other than Fox news. I avail myself of them.

Republican David Frum (@davidfrum): Republicans have been fleeced, exploited, and lied to by a conservative entertainment complex.

This is a entertainment group set up by Keith Rupert Murdoch, making money and laughing all the way to the bank. As Fox, and The Wall Street Journal, The Times, 20th Century Fox (CBS)


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by lily316 z5PA (My Page) on Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 17:22

"Tell those two old white men their time in the sun is over. President Obama was forceful today in defending Susan Rice and set the tone...nobody is going to mess with him now. They can't deny him a third term."

Pearls from an old white woman.

-----------------

Lot of talk about Fox and Demi. Nobody noticed that she doesn't watch Fox. Similarities in what she says and what kate says Fox says? Dunno. Could be Fox and Demi got the info from the same source(s). That's what I'm thinking.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Fox is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Republican Party, and is but one outlet for GOP propaganda. One does not need to view FOX to absorb GOP/Tea Party propaganda; various media disseminate the narratives.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Absolutely.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You're missing the point, Elvis. It is a closed system, circulating the same narrative around and around and around. Doesn't matter which Republican source she gets it from. It's the same propaganda that is being shown on Fox News--and all of it is WRONG and UNRELIABLE because it is propaganda formulated mainly to "get" Obama and his officials. That is the point.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Ahhh. I didn't miss the point, Kate; but I'm pretty sure a lot of these posters do. The tiresome harping about Fox is very telling in that respect, I think.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Elvis, it is only tiresome because you continue to plug your ears with your fingers and say, "Not true. Not true. Not true. I'm not listening". It's crazy. You are the only one that is right. Yep, there isn't a bias with Fox.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Americans are an impatient lot, aren't they? Two months is nothing in an investigation, depending upon what's being investigated.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

"Yep, there isn't a bias with Fox."

My point made, thank you Frank ;D


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

No problem.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Just in the year 2009 "could happen to anyone anywhere anytime"
I love when posts get tto this stage "when you try to take their SOMA away"

Fox News presents year-old Palin footage as new Palin book tour crowd. As Think Progress first noted, on the November 18 edition of Happening Now, guest co-host Gregg Jarrett used old footage -- which he said was "just coming in to us" -- of a McCain-Palin rally from last year to illustrate how Sarah Palin is "continuing to draw huge crowds" during her book tour. The following day, Skinner apologized for "mistakenly" airing the fake crowd video.

Stewart blasts Hannity for using old video footage to inflate Bachmann rally attendance. During the November 10 edition of Comedy Central's The Daily Show with Jon Stewart, Stewart blasted Fox News host Sean Hannity for attempting to inflate the crowd size of Rep. Michele Bachmann's (R-MN) Fox News-fueled GOP rally against health care reform by using footage of the crowd at the better-attended 9-12 rally. On the November 11 edition of his program, Hannity said he "screwed up" and apologized for airing "incorrect video" of 9-12 protests while discussing the Bachmann rally.

Fox News' Garrett apologizes for fake HBO-Obama story -- which Fox News repeated days later. During the November 4 edition of America's Newsroom, guest co-host Martha MacCallum started the fake story that President Obama watched an HBO special about himself instead of the November 3 election returns. The fake story was then picked up by Rush Limbaugh, among others, who claimed that "[i]f a documentary could get anal poisoning, this one could." On the November 4 edition of Studio B with Shepard Smith, White House correspondent Major Garrett apologized for mishearing press secretary Robert Gibbs and passing on the erroneous information. Despite the Fox News correction, on the November 8 edition of Fox News Watch, Fox News' weekly media analysis program, host Jon Scott repeated the fake story, claiming that Obama was "watching the HBO documentary. ... Now, maybe that's the one thing that could pull him away from -- from election returns."

Kilmeade: Americans don't have "pure genes" like Swedes because "we keep marrying other species and other ethnics." As Gawker noted, on the July 8 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Brian Kilmeade said that Americans don't have "pure genes" like Swedes because "we keep marrying other species and other ethnics." Kilmeade apologized for his "inappropriate" remarks on July 20.

Democrat Mark Sanford. During the June 24 edition of Fox News' Live Desk, while covering a press conference of embattled South Carolina Gov. Mark Sanford, Fox News ran on-screen text identifying him as a Democrat:

Wash. Post's Ignatius: CIA Document Supported Rice's Description Of Attack As Reaction To Anti-Islam Video. Washington Post columnist David Ignatius reported that the CIA had confirmed that Rice's description of the Benghazi attack on the Sunday shows was accurate:

"Talking points" prepared by the CIA on Sept. 15, the same day that Rice taped three television appearances, support her description of the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate as a reaction to Arab anger about an anti-Muslim video prepared in the United States. According to the CIA account, "The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations." [Washington Post, 10/19/12]

Here come the three STOOGES!

Kilmeade: "I Think Democrats Have To Feel Like [Rice Is] An Embarrassment." On November 14, the co-hosts of Fox News' Fox & Friends discussed whether Susan Rice might replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state. Co-host Steve Doocy stated, "For a while it looked like Susan Rice would, but then she gave that cockamamie answer about the videotape regarding the Benghazi incident. So a lot of people have said, "She's damaged goods, she could never possibly get the job," could she? Co-host Brian Kilmeade added, "I think the Democrats have to feel like she's an embarrassment. She went out there and had her answer widely panned. Does the president really want to relitigate this fight? And go back to the days when Susan Rice was making believe that the tape was the real deal?" [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 11/14/12]

Megyn Kelly Questioned Whether Rice Could Become Sec. Of State After She Linked Benghazi Attack To Video. America Live host Megyn Kelly said, "I think now all of our viewers know [Rice], because she's the one who went on all the Sunday talk shows and told us that everything that happened in Benghazi was linked to this video, which we now know was not the case. Can she possibly ascend into the Cabinet, into this position in the Cabinet, given that?" [Fox News, America Live, 11/13/12]

Doocy: "To A Lot Of People," Susan Rice Is "Damaged Goods" After Appearing On The Sunday Shows. On the November 8 edition of Fox & Friends, co-host Doocy said, "[W]ho's going to take [Clinton's] place? Well, the conventional wisdom is -- it had been -- Susan Rice. But she's -- to a lot of people, she's damaged goods after what she said on all the Sunday chat shows. It would be a tough confirmation." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 11/8/12]

There's pages of their crap out there!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by marquest z5 PA (My Page) on
Wed, Nov 14, 12 at 17:08

President tell Graham & McCain back off Rice!

I was so proud. McCain will never forget he lost. What he said today was nasty.

I'm proud of him too and he isn't my president. I'm beginning to wonder about McCain. I think he is losing it.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

And the believers continue to blindly believe. It doesn't matter what you show them that proves Fox's dishonesty. Willful ignorance at best,...


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

It's a tribal thing. Us-versus-them syndrome


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

That is a whitewashing of the ugly Right Wing entertainment complex and a convenient excuse for those addicted to Fixed News, Limbaugh et. al..


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Precisely, Marshall.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

And you know me how, Elvis? Interesting how you stalk me here talking about my age(which of course you have not a clue), my house and all sorts of things. You remind me of Paula Broadwell, an online stalker. Is this how you get your kicks? It's just so bothersome.

People who listen to Fox are brainwashed and cannot break their allegiance to their gods who tell them exactly HOW to think and what the message du jour is. Benghazi, Petraeus, ??? What WILL it be?.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I seed that there are a lot of liberals that watch Fox when I don't--Kate obviously does because she tells me all the time what Fox has to say.

But this thread isn't about what television stations anyone watches.

It's about four dead Americans and a president and administration that allowed it to happen, have lied about what happen, and still haven't told us what exactly DID happen.

But I'm sure quoting Fox talking heads is preferable to discussing why four Americans were slaughtered and left to die alone by the Obama Administration and why so many different stories and lies were told when we know for sure that there was different information at the highest level while the lies were still being promulgated by the administration.

It's very telling when that pathetic deflection game is played, attacking the messenger.

Saul Alinsky would be proud.

I don't know how Obama sleeps at night.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I spent an hour last night, time better spent in sleep, cruising the cable and other "news" channels looking for coverage of the Benghazi Affair. My conclusion: this has been taken over by some hard-nosed politicians attempting to distract from and diminish the Obama victory and proposed agenda in Congressional relations. Because of Obama's strong position generally, his ideological opponents are going after those around him: Rice at the UN, leadership at the CIA and military, and other convenient targets allied with this administration.

With a negating of Rice as a possible Sec. of State, Sen. Kerry (of Swift Boat infamy) is next up in line. Scott Brown could then run for the open Mass. Senate seat.

The charge of the Republican Brigade is being led by Sen. Graham and McCain. Not good news for hopes for bipartisanship down the line. Some of the rhetoric coming from these two is astounding. The end of civilization may be at hand if a "Watergate" Commission is not impaneled immediately and the current Administration brought to account.

Just some reflections in this early morning hour.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Sorry for typos this morning.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Interesting how you don't address any of the points made. Like the fact that you're repeating things that have been disproven (the stand down nonsense). Like the fact that investigations are still on going. Investigations led by Obama haters. Nope you don't address a single one of those things. You just attack those not willing to live in the fox news bubble. You want to live there? Fine. But the rest of us live in reality.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

If you are so dissatisfied with Issa's investigation of the deaths in Benghazi, Demi, why don't you take it up with him? Nobody here is in a position to answer your questions, but he is.

Here is a link that might be useful: http://issa.house.gov/


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

My representatives already know that I feel this matter should be thoroughly investigated.

Posters posting nothing but these "Fox" posts are just typing until they think of something to say.

Which is taking a very long time in some instances.

When someone does address what we DO know, and why they think the stories are not straight and why they think the Obama Administration allowed our citizens to remain in peril and be slaughtered, then I'll listen.

Anytime I see "Fox" and "Faux News" in a post I scroll on along and don't bother to read it--that tact shows the poster has nothing better coming out of their brain than to attack and insult other posters.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi I can only give you my opinion why I think/feel you and others continue to bring it up is because of Fox. It just seems like it is desperation from the Right to say anything because they lost the election.

It is sad because when this is all over the people are going to look foolish like when Romney lost because they are being lead into a false outrage.

My reason is questions that were asked and not answered.....

Chase asked.....
Why did the Republicans not make anything of this during the election, especially ISSA ?

Why is it that conservatives believe the Republican investigative committees are covering up the truth?

I wonder why Romney or Issa or any other Republican did not use this during the campaign against the President. If there was a smoking gun I think they would have used the info.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Interesting how you don't address any of the points made. Like the fact that you're repeating things that have been disproven (the stand down nonsense).

As I wrote earlier, Benghazi conspiracy will be the birther movement of President Obama's second term.

General Petraeus won't have to worry about his presidential ambitions being hurt.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

General Petraeus won't have to worry about his presidential ambitions being hurt.

*

Oh yes he does.

I don't know any conservative that would support him.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You need only read media matters to know what Faux has said, recanted, misrepresented or apologized for in their history!
Again this is my favorite time in a thread when the sleepwalkers defend their information drugs of choice!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I don't know any conservative that would support him.

Too small a sample to be statistically significant.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

OF course.

We'll see if he runs next time, won't we?

I won't be a supporter of someone with such poor judgment, and someone that I happen to believe has compromised himself in order to try to save his own career.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi, you are right. My posts were never about which source you use. I don't know why you thought they were--unless you were just trying to deflect.

The point of my post was that you are just repeating Republican talking points--same language that pops up on Fox news which just repeats Republican talking points. Those same talking points appear on just about every other anti-Obama source--same language that pops up on Fox News.

I don't really care who originated the talking points/language. What I am amazed at is how gullible Republicans and their sympathizers are, repeating the points over and over again, spreading unprovable rumors in hopes that a rumor repeated enough times will begin to sound like a Truth--when it is nothing but uncontrolled speculation.

You know the reason you get no answers to some of your questions from other posters on this forum. We have told you many times--so you should know, at least.

We have admitted we do not know the answers to many of those questions (and we are not going to make up answers just to please you). We've also repeatedly informed you that we are willing to wait for the FOUR OFFICIAL INVESTIGATIONS to be completed. When they present us with the facts that could be verified and the conclusions they draw from those facts, we will be in a position to draw our own conclusions.

In the meantime, we can correct you people when you make incorrect statements. Other than that we will wait for the investigators, including the Obama-hater Issa, to finish their investigations. Going over this material again and again and again serves no purpose--it's like running repeatedly into a brick wall. Didn's someone call that "insane"?

(Now hang onto your blood pressure, demi. Nobody is personally insulting you. Those statements are not directed personally at you--they are for "you people"--as in "plural"--and I just repeated the brick wall statement that I have heard many, many Republicans use in Congress against the Democrats--a little ironic humor, don't ya know?)

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

The fact, Kate, is, if you had posted something like that in the beginning I wouldn't have had to call you out on the Fox comments.

I am dead serious, when I glance at a post and see "Fox" I don't bother to read it all. It tells me all I need to know, that a poster is almost always talking about other posters rather than the subject, and always in a denigrating manner.

The fact is, we speculate here ALL THE TIME--as I noted, threads and threads and threads and threads speculating about Romney's taxes, about Bain capital, about Saran Palin and what she meant with the comments about firearms, speculation, speculation, speculation.

And all of a sudden, I'm chastised for speculating--and rightfully so considering two months out we have conflicting stories, lies obviously told when from Obama on down we know they knew different than what HE SAID and what Susan Rice was told to say, and I'm supposed to keep my mouth shut until the "investigations" clear it all up?

Not going to happen.

If you don't want to participate, I totally understand.

I didn't care to speculate about what might be in Romney's tax returns and certainly was not going to pronounce him a "tax cheat" like some did her, with no information and no knowledge.

But then Romney didn't send people overseas and leave them in harm's way and allowed them to be slaughtered in a terrorist attack on 9-11 and then tell different stories about what happened.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Judge (ret.) Andrew Napolitano believes that someone, probably the FBI, was out to get Patraeus as well as to embarrass the President.

Here is a link that might be useful: Silencing General Patraeus


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

.....and allowed them to be slaughtered......

And thats based on what established, widely recognized facts? Could you list them?

Or its just more of the same, well established, widely recognized BS spewed about this by the far right.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

What else would you call it, David?

The Obama administration KNEW of the dangers, of Al Qaeda's growing stronghold in the region, the Obama administration KNEW that Ambassador Stevens has REPEATEDLY requested additional security, the Obama Administration had NO viable plan in the case of a terrorist attack, and Obama Administration did NOT GET HELP to those people over hours and hours of attack--ON SEPTEMBER 11!

I call that "allowing them to be slaughtered."

You can make excuses for this administration and pretty it up any way you want.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You can make excuses for this administration and pretty it up any way you want.

Where did I make any excuses, or pretty any thing up? An example?

I stated clearly earlier in this thread that I supported the assorted inquires into what happened, and will wait until they present their results. And that hopefully, this will lead to better security and safety for our citizens working abroad.

I also stated that what I detest is the deliberate distortions, outright lies, and hyperbolic politicization - in which you wallow.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

And when I see propaganda language that has been repeated over and over and over again in new posts, I too start to ignore some of the posts and move on.

I'm serious, demi, do you plan to repeat these unproved speculations every day? Maybe you could start a new thread every day -- just repeating the same language and unproven accusations until a miracle occurs and they become truths?

And by the way, if you bothered to read my posts carefully, you would find that I did not say you watch Fox News and copied their statements/language. You made that up and then accused me of having said that. I DID NOT. I posted a rant against Fox News (it did not mention you) and I posted another post in which I noted your language was simliar to Fox's--but that is all I said. So quit putting words in my mouth and then doing one of your self-righteous struts across the stage!

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

posted a rant against Fox News (it did not mention you) and I posted another post in which I noted your language was simliar to Fox's--but that is all I said.

*

Ummm hmmmm.

I've not stated anything that is not true.

WE KNOW the Obama administration knew during the attacks this was no protest to videos.

WE KNOW President Obama AND the Obama Administration blamed this on a video, multiple times, at at the United Nations, WE KNOW THAT Hilary Clinton blamed it on a video, and we know the Obama Administration had Susan Rice blame it on a video when they knew that was not the case.

That's called a lie.

We KNOW proper security was requested and we KNOW they didn't get it.

We KNOW that those people were under attack and we KNOW the Obama Administration did not come to their aid.

We KNOW there was no viable plan to thwart a terrorist attack in Benghazi.

There are no lies in that; I don't need to watch any slanted news to know that.

As to all of the details, I don't know.
Neither do you.

I have every right to ask questions and comment about what we DO KNOW.

I have done that.

This thread is not about my right to state my opinion.

That's a given, people.

Too bad you don't like hearing it.

Contrary to what Barack Obama says, Al Qaeda is NOT ON IT'S HEELS.

We deserve answers and the truth.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Yes, we all are waiting for some answers.

The difference is some of us are not salivating, much less excessively, about how this info., even before it is available to any of us, can maybe be used to undermine the Obama administration--especially the President himself, if at all possible.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Kate, I don't WANT the Obama Administration to be "undermined." I am not "salivating" at the failure of this country, or Obama.

I want him to do the right thing and get on with getting this country back in good shape, and I want that transparency he promised.

I want the truth and I want answers for what happened in Banghazi and WHY it happened. I want responsibility and assurances the situation will not be set up again that allowed this to happen as it did.

I know full well any government can't stop bad things from happening, but this slaughter of four Americans was staring the Obama Administration in the face and they allowed it to happen.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Admittedly I was reading this thread very quickly, but Demi, your last paragraph had me thinking you were describing Bush sending thousands and thousands of our soldiers to be slaughtered and then told different stories about why they were .

I am not being facetious, I said I was skimming, saw 911, slaughtered, and seriously wondered why you were bashing Bush.

The Benghazi incident was terrible, but has been so magnified and rehashed over and over by Fox ,that it got legs of it's own. If it happened under Bush, they would have barely mentioned it. They were in a crazed frenzy to have Romney win they went nuts. An example is when one of the worse natural disasters hit this country, when I flipped to Fox at the gym(when CNN was in commercial) ,I was astounded that it was NOT their top story, it was Benghazi, weeks old by that time. This is the mindset. Feed the frenzy. Of course it didn't work.

When Bush disregarded the reports coming to him and Rice during the summer of 911 of planes flying into buildings, where was your outrage then? Bush and Rice said we didn't think it would actually happen. But it did ,and 3000 innocents died, not four, but 3000. Then we were lied into a war in Iraq which killed many thousands more and was totally unnecessary. Where are your threads about that? Can't you at least wait till this investigation is finished?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Bush isn't president anymore, Lily.

Barack Obama has been president four years and just got reelected to another four years.

Bush is not relevant.

Obama's failure at Benghazi is what this thread is about.

I have questions before this investigation is finished, because we've already been lied to by Obama and others in his administration.

Over two months have passed and we still have no answers, only stonewalling.

I think that these facts alone are an outrage, regardless of what investigations reveal.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

  • Posted by bboy USDA 8 Sunset 5 WA (My Page) on
    Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 12:40

Forum continues to be wound up by same few zealots, maybe that's why they're called cranks.

Whole threads consisting of everyone else trying to address the wrong-headedness is not very interesting or informative.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Bush will always be relevant as a recent part our history. He can't be as easily pushed off the table as some would like.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Besides, the point was about the contradictory attitude of posters towards Bush (as compared to Obama), and not about Bush per se. The attitudes are still relevant.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I want the truth and I want answers for what happened in Banghazi and WHY it happened. I want responsibility and assurances the situation will not be set up again that allowed this to happen as it did.

And I believe that's exactly what the ongoing investigations are doing.

Do you not think that's what they are doing?

Do you think anyone here or in the public has any of the answers?

Why do you keep asking us to speculate? We clearly do not want to speculate.

Sure, we can speculate about why Romney refused to release his tax returns. Nobody died in that little saga.

I am not willing to speculate about what happened when people died until all the facts are known.

The repeated right wing talking points do nothing but make you look foolish. And the repeating of already disproven information doesn't help. In fact, that is called lying.

When the investigation is done and information is released, then and only then can an intelligent conversation about the incident happen.

Until then, enjoy the foaming at the mouth you're doing. It's really quite ugly.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

So Demi, are you going to send a note to McCain asking why he missed the private meeting on Benghazi yesterday?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I didn't know that, chloe.

No, I see no reason to contact John McCain.

*

Posted by jillinnj (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 12:53

Until then, enjoy the foaming at the mouth you're doing. It's really quite ugly.

*

My concern about this matter is not "foaming at the mouth."

Your characterization of my legitimate concerns and comment is the only thing that is ugly, but not a surprise.

One day perhaps you will tell me why you came on this forum and immediately started personally attacking me and looking for any reason to make these types of comments.

I don't know who you are, haven't engaged you about your opinions or made personally disparaging remarks about you for giving our opinion.

Unfortunately, you continue to do this to me.

What is about me that makes you feel like you have to say these sorts of things about me, personally, jillinnj?

Are you intolerant of my opinions, perhaps you didn't like some photo I posted on the decorating forum, what causes you to be consumed with making these comments about me?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Wow--I thought you were the person who regularly objects--very loudly--to poster's attacking other posters! That was quite some attack on jill, rather than on the points she made about Benghazi and the investigations.

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Unfortunately for your point of view Demi-if all the things were known that you say were known then the responsibility lies with the Ambassador who would know that he did not have adequate protection to go to Benghazi. Since I have heard no where that the visit was of any compelling importance and knowing that the area was seriously unstable he should have shown better judgement. He would know that assitance from US sources would be a long time in coming if there was a problem. He would know that the Libyan government was still very weak in that area and help there would be problematic. If he had survived the attack I am willing to speculate that he would have taken responsibility for a judgement error that took the lives of his co workers. He was a professional and apparently very good at his job. He was well liked and respected in the country. He chose to put his life at risk. I assum there must have been some reason for it.

Do we know if the people who attacked knew that the Ambassador was in the building? I suppose that is one of those unasnwered questions that the investigation might someday answer.

I see this as part of the balancing act of world diplomacy-total safety cowering behind bunkered walls and a free and open exchange.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Lets try this out:

We KNOW that the semi-literate, ideologically driven teabaggers in Congress refused to spend $100,000,000 on requested extra security, even though the Secretary of State and her staff asked repeatedly for more protection. Their hands drip red with the blood of these dead heroes. (<=='drip crimson' maybe?)

We KNOW that following the Black Water Mercenary massacre in Iraq, the one caused by the wholesale privatization of diplomatic security under the Bush Administration, has led to the wide-spread scrutiny, limitations, if not outright refusal by numerous middle eastern countries to have these untouchable, unaccountable, politically immune private security contractors present on their soil. Why are the Republicans swayed by the campaign contributions from these mercenary outfits, and allow this to continue? (<==just asking questions, here)


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

This thread needs to go bye-bye. This is NOT a poster attack, but a reality check and a concern.

OCD is a real psychological problem.
I believe the Benghazi threads have crossed over to the abnormal behaviour arena.
I suggest some serious therapy for those who are still obssessing, but do not comprehend the full MidEast war effect. The numerous/obssessive threads are scary.

I'm out of this thread, in fear, as I know that many obssessive people can snap easily.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by dublinbay z6 KS (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 13:08

Wow--I thought you were the person who regularly objects--very loudly--to poster's attacking other posters! That was quite some attack on jill, rather than on the points she made about Benghazi and the investigations.

Kate

*

WOW, Kate, can't you read?

That wasn't an attack.

That was asking jillinnj why she constantly makes personally insulting comments to me.

That was asking jillinnj why she characterized my questioning of the events at Benghazi as "foaming at the mouth."

Perhaps you should learn what constitutes a personal attack and what constitutes asking questions of a poster as to why she consistently makes disparaging comments to and about another poster, as jillinj does to me.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

My concern about this matter is not "foaming at the mouth."

It's not concern. If you were concerned, you'd wait for the investigations to be complete. Instead you just keep repeating talking points that have already been proven false.

It comes off to me as "foaming at the mouth".

In case you didn't figure it out, that's my opinion. I'm entitled to my opinion. Just because you don't like my opinion won't stop me from giving it.

perhaps you didn't like some photo I posted on the decorating forum

Huh? I do not remember a single picture you posted on the decorating forum. What a strange thing to say.

what causes you to be consumed with making these comments about me?

Consumed? Also a strange thing to say. Believe it or not, and I'm sure you won't because it's hard for you to believe it's not all about you, I'm not "consumed" with you. I post my opinion about things you say. I do that with lots of people and in lots of posts. But, of course, you only see it through the "demi lense". Try widening the lens once in a while.

And, as Kate pointed out, and I did in my post, why don't you address the points I made in my post? The points lots of others have made in their posts? You are repeating right wing talking points that have been proven false. Why do you continue to do that? The only logical conclusion one can come to is you will do and say anything to make Obama look bad. The only one you make look bad is yourself.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Proof positive!~


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

demi, you are entitled to your (unproven) opinion --as you like to remind us--but no matter how often you insist on having the "last word," you don't convince anyone else that you have proven your point. And if you are entitled to your (unproven) opinion, so is every other poster --and it is my opinion that you are unbelievably insulting and harassing of several posters on this forum. You can think about it any way you wish, but the rest of us will form our own opinions.

Now add your "last word"--knowing that you will have convinced no one on this forum that you are right (well--except for a couple rightwingers who already agreed with you).

Myself, I'm outa here. Pointless. Pointless. Pointless. (My opinion--to which I am entitled--right!)

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

demi, you are entitled to your (unproven) opinion --as you like to remind us--but no matter how often you insist on having the "last word," you don't convince anyone else that you have proven your point. And if you are entitled to your (unproven) opinion, so is every other poster --and it is my opinion that you are unbelievably insulting and harassing of several posters on this forum. You can think about it any way you wish, but the rest of us will form our own opinions.

Now add your "last word"--knowing that you will have convinced no one on this forum that you are right (well--except for a couple rightwingers who already agreed with you).

Myself, I'm outa here. Pointless. Pointless. Pointless. (My opinion--to which I am entitled--right!)

Kate


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Proof Positive Redux!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Proof positive!~

Yes, proof that you're not capable or willing to address the facts. Again. Carry on.

Kate, wait for me...


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Proof Positive Troisieme!~


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

  • Posted by vgkg 7-Va Tidewater (My Page) on
    Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 15:49

The "librul media" loves a scandel, it's just waiting for the facts stemming from the investigations before jumping to far out conclusions about the prez. Unlike Fox, which doesn't seem to mind making fools of itself and it's viewers. If Fox acted more like 60 Minutes and less like Nancy Grace then people might see them as serious journalism. As long as ratings are good they don't care about their overall "news" quality.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

For those interested in the facts of the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, the WSJ published an article detailing its function as a CIA outpost. The site linked to (a little eyebrow raising) reproduces the WSJ article which is behind a subscribers-only firewall. US mission in Benghazi was a CIA operation. The entire article is worth reading, especially the criticisms of General Petraeus.

When the bodies of Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans killed in Benghazi, Libya, arrived at Andrews Air Force Base after the Sept. 11 attack, they were greeted by the president, the vice president and the secretaries of state and defense. Conspicuously absent was CIA Director David Petraeus.

Officials close to Mr. Petraeus say he stayed away in an effort to conceal the agency's role in collecting intelligence and providing security in Benghazi. Two of the four men who died that day, Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty, were former Navy SEAL commandos who were publicly identified as State Department contract security officers, but who actually worked as Central Intelligence Agency contractors, U.S. officials say.

The U.S. effort in Benghazi was at its heart a CIA operation, according to officials briefed on the intelligence. Of the more than 30 American officials evacuated from Benghazi following the deadly assault, only seven worked for the State Department. Nearly all the rest worked for the CIA, under diplomatic cover, which was a principal purpose of the consulate, these officials said. [...]

This account of the CIA presence in Benghazi sheds new light on the events, and how the essentially covert nature of the U.S. operations there created confusion. Congressional investigators say it appears that the CIA and State Department weren't on the same page about their respective roles on security, underlining the rift between agencies over taking responsibility and raising questions about whether the security arrangement in Benghazi was flawed.

The CIA's secret role helps explain why security appeared inadequate at the U.S. diplomatic facility. State Department officials believed that responsibility was set to be shouldered in part by CIA personnel in the city through a series of secret agreements that even some officials in Washington didn't know about.

It also explains why the consulate was abandoned to looters for weeks afterward while U.S. efforts focused on securing the more important CIA quarters. Officials say it is unclear whether the militants knew about the CIA presence or stumbled upon the facility by following Americans there after the attack on the consulate. [...]

The FBI didn't initially get to review surveillance footage taken at the compound because officials say it was being analyzed by the CIA. The CIA, in turn, wasn't able to immediately get copies of FBI witness interviews, delaying the agency's analysis of what happened outside the consulate and at the annex.

A senior congressional investigator said the secrecy has made it harder to figure out what errors were made, because classification restrictions have allowed the CIA to avoid public and congressional scrutiny for its conduct. Information about the CIA's role has largely been limited to congressional intelligence committees, which are reviewing the attacks but have not launched investigations into them.

Foreign Policy has an interesting run down of questions -- What you need to know about Benghazi going into this week's congressional hearings -- some of which leap out:

Even if no one was intentionally misleading the public, lawmakers will likely want to know why a consulate that was primarily a CIA front did not know what was happening immediately outside its walls -- or how the intelligence community could still be feeding the administration bad information weeks after the fact. [...]

The appearance of an unarmed surveillance drone in both [CIA and Pentagon] timelines suggests some level of cooperation [between the CIA and Pentagon], especially since the CIA's timeline states that the drone failed to observe the mortars that eventually killed CIA contractors Glen Doherty and Tyrone Woods, but lawmakers will likely want to fill these and other holes in the current accounting. [...]

Another question that may come up is why, according to the CIA's timeline, the Global Response Staff team that arrived in Benghazi from Tripoli at 1:15 a.m. did not leave the airport until 4:30 a.m. The timeline explains away the lapse by citing "negotiations with Libyan authorities over permission to leave the airport; obtaining vehicles; and the need to frame a clear mission plan." It's certainly possible that they were delayed by local authorities, but it seems likely that lawmakers will want to know why a trained military response squad couldn't negotiate a couple of rental cars in under three hours. Likewise, there are unanswered questions about why reinforcements were needed in the first place. Out of more than 30 employees at the consulate in Benghazi, only seven worked for the State Department. "Nearly all the rest worked for the CIA, under diplomatic cover, which was a principal purpose of the consulate," according to the Wall Street Journal. If there were so many CIA operatives at the consulate, why did it fall to Doherty and Woods to make a heroic defense of the compound?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

So Demi, are you going to send a note to McCain asking why he missed the private meeting on Benghazi yesterday?

We already know why he missed the briefing on Benghazi...so he and Lindsey could attack Obama at a news conference. Same thing with them attacking Susan Rice BEFORE Obama has even mentioned about his cabinet replacements. Pre-emptive strikes on Obama by the Republican, good old white guys hierarchy.

The Republican Party is rotten and it wont change until the rot is excised. You can't teach an old dog new tricks...like learning how to work together.

-Ron-


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by fouquieria 10b (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 15:53

"good old white guys hierarchy."

*

Why bring the color of someone's skin into this conversation?

If the color of skin were black and someone noted it under the same circumstances, cries of "racism" would abound.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Why bring the color of someone's skin into this conversation?

Weak.

McCain says he is going to block Susan Rice if she's nominated for Secretary of State.

A different Rice, Condoleeza, got his vote for Secretary of State despite the fact that she was Bush's National Security Advisor prior to the attack on the World Trade Center and during the run up to the war in Iraq.

Enough already with the double standards.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi, I'm still on vacation but wanted to see if everyone is singing in perfect harmony on HT. LOL.

As precious GD asks, "Grammy, where are the pretty
pictures in that book you are reading", as she notices
me reading HT.

I do have a picture but I'm sorry to say its not pretty.
The picture of the eight it is called.
I honestly don't know what to think .

Its not simple. Too many characters. Too much of what is in the following links.

Will the FBI cover-up.
Will the CIA cover-up.

CIA-FBI Feud
May 26, 2002 ��" 11 has vaulted the rivalry between the FBI and CIA--one of the oldest back-fence feuds in the nation's capital--outside the bounds of ...

CIA v. FBI in Petraeus scandal ��" Amanpour - CNN.com Blogsamanpour.blogs.cnn.com/.../cia-v-fbi-in-petraeusscandal/Cached

by Samuel Burke -

1 day ago ��" There has been long-standing rivalry between the FBI and the CIA and a turbulent history of a lack of communication and cooperation. Weiner ...
More by Samuel Burke Wedge - The Secret War between the FBI and CIA - Wikiquoteen.wikiquote.org/.../Wedge_-_The_Secret_War_between_the_FBI_
If Riebling's thesis -- that the FBI-CIA rivalry had 'damaged the national security and, to that extent, imperiled the Republic' -- was provocative at the time, ...

It may take forever for this tale to be sorted .
Here is picture that made me sad.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You people are shameless.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

citywoman, thanks for taking time out of your vacation to paint the REAL "picture."


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi, may I ask you how you KNOW all of the things you say you know?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I popped over to foxnews.com and the top story (with the biggest picture) is "Did the White House lie about Libya" and then the 3 stories under it (with medium pictures) are:

- Israel/Gaza war escalating
- Restaurant owner plans to charge customers for Obamacare
- Mitt Romney says Obama won because of "gifts" to "key groups"

The Petraeus affair is not there.
The BP settlement and manslaughter charges is not there.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Gee, Chase, same reason you KNOW the sun came up this morning.

I HEARD Obama speak himself.
I HEARD Hilary Clinton speak herself.
I HEARD Susan Rice speak herself.

I READ and HEARD from multiple news sources that Ambassador Stevens asked for additional security.

I KNOW that the grisly deaths occurred on the anniversary of the 9-11 terrorist attacks in this country.

I HAVE a calendar.

I KNOW that four people are dead from multiple reports.

I KNOW that the Obama Administration did not get people in to save them because they are STONE COLD DEAD.

I have read from MULTIPLE SOURCES that Al Qaeda was gaining stronghold in Libya, and particularly in Benghazi.

Those FACTS are enough to cause great concern.

Done playing "prove the sun rises in the east" with you, Chase.

Too bad the FACTS don't honor Obama.

Too bad Obama didn't honor four Americans who needlessly died BEFORE they were left to be murdered.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

LOL


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Too bad the FACTS don't honor Obama.

Please see what I posted above from the WSJ and FP.

There are any number of reasons why the tragic deaths in Benghazi happened, and so far it doesn't look good for the CIA or the leadership General Petraeus.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I meant how you KNOW these things in your earlier post. The all caps are simply to indicate what you state you KNOW that I don't think have been determined the brackets are what I believe we don't KNOW about what you KNOW.

WE KNOW the Obama administration KNEW DURING the attacks this was no protest to videos.( there is no information in the public domain that would suggest that)

WE KNOW President Obama AND the Obama Administration blamed this on a video, multiple times, at at the United Nations, WE KNOW THAT Hilary Clinton blamed it on a video, and we know the Obama Administration had Susan Rice blame it on a video WHEN THEY KNEW that was not the case. ( We don't know what they knew and when they knew it , even Condi Rice says the information can be incredibly fluid in situations like that and says no one should rush to judgment.)

We KNOW proper security was requested and we KNOW they didn't get it. ( I'm not sure the WHY on that is understood )

We KNOW that those people were under attack and we KNOW the Obama Administration did not come to their aid. ( We don't know any of the specifics on why that happened....sending combat groups into a sovereign country can get a little touchy...we also don't KNOW that the President was involved or even knew of those requests)

We KNOW there was no viable plan to thwart a terrorist attack in Benghazi. ( Not sure how we know that it must be remembered that Benhgazi was not an Embassy and we don't know if the Ambassador was expected to be there.)

I am not being argumentative but I respectfully submit we don't KNOW anything. Isn't that the big complaint of McCain et al...they don't KNOW anything ... they have NO answers only questions?


 o
RE:From the Horses mouth to the Horses Ass

You'll notice McCain skipped the hearing this way he can keep flapping his gums about what he never heard.

Horse Mouth to the Horses asses!

Former CIA Director David Petraeus on Thursday said his resignation had nothing to do with the attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, and denied disclosing any classified information.

Petraeus�s comments come a day before he is expected to testify to the House and Senate Intelligence committees at closed-door hearings. Those hearings are expected to focus on what Petraeus saw when he visited Benghazi.

"His assessment of what he found on the ground is absolutely crucial to put together with the other pieces of the puzzle people�s view of what happened during and after the event," Sen. Richard Burr (R-N.C.) said Thursday as he exited a House Intelligence Committee hearing on Benghazi.
Burr is a member of the Senate Intelligence panel that will grill Petraeus on Friday. It is holding its own hearing Thursday with acting CIA Director Michael Morell.

The panels are asking questions about the administration�s account of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi that left U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans dead. The administration initially described the attack as spinning out of a protest against an anti-Islam video, before acknowledging it was a terrorist attack days later.

Questions have also been raised about security at the consulate and at other locations in Benghazi that were covert CIA installations.

The shocking resignation of Petraeus has raised new questions about the intelligence on Benghazi, particularly after he initially canceled appearances with the two panels this week following his decision to leave the government.

Petraeus�s first comments since his resignation were to CNN Headline News reporter Kyra Phillips. He told Phillips he had not provided any classified documents to his biographer, Paula Broadwell, with whom he had an extramarital affair.

Petraeus said he resigned from the CIA because of the affair and believed standing down from his post was the appropriate response, according to Phillips.

Petraeus added that he did not try to persuade others in the administration to allow him to keep his job once he admitted the affair, according to the report. The four-star general said he had not spoken to Broadwell since his resignation last week.

President Obama and other administration officials have at times blamed faulty intelligence for the conflicting stories about the Benghazi attack.

Burr agreed intelligence was "scattered" initially, but said he believed different parts of the community were coming together.

"I think the entire intelligence community seems to be on the same page, where they were scattered for the first several weeks of this," he said. Of Petraeus�s testimony, he said, "I think this is just one piece of the puzzle that either confirms or changes other pieces, or realigns them."

Two lawmakers attending Thursday�s House hearing suggested the focus of lawmakers will be on Benghazi and not on Petraeus�s affair.

"No, we�ll talk about Benghazi," answered Rep. Mike Conaway (R-Texas) in response to a question about whether lawmakers would discuss Petraeus�s affair and resignation.

Burr, when asked about interest in the hearing about Petraeus�s affair, responded, "None."

Burr also threw cold water on a suggestion from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) that a select committee be set up to investigate what happened in Benghazi.

"It�s important that the committees with jurisdiction have an opportunity to do their oversight role," he said. "In the case of the Senate and House Intelligence committee[s], we�re the primary responsibility for oversight of the intelligence community; this is not something that needs to be farmed out unless committee can�t function."

Lawmakers have launched a number of investigations into whether the diplomatic mission in Benghazi had been provided adequate security before the attack, as well as into the administration's response.

Petraeus was initially slated to testify at two closed-door Intelligence Committee hearings Thursday. He will not testify separately on Friday before both the House and Senate Intelligence committees.

The House Intelligence Committee announced Wednesday evening that Petraeus would come in Friday morning, and the Senate panel confirmed Thursday that it would have Petraeus testify later Friday morning.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also will testify about the Benghazi attacks, House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairwoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.) announced Thursday.



"I have spoken to Secretary Clinton's counselor and chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, and the secretary has committed to testifying before our committee and the Senate Foreign Relations [Committee] on the Accountability Review Board's report, which is expected to be concluded by early to mid-December," Ros-Lehtinen said in her prepared opening remarks.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

"Done playing "prove the sun rises in the east" with you, Chase."

Didn't see that comment before I posted. Could you please indicate to me where on this thread I have been playing any such game with you?

I have asked several serious and respectfully posed question none of which have been answered. Perhaps your "done " because you have no fact based, cogent responses.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Demi is probably upset that one of her GOP heroes Petraeus was more egregious in his conduct that Clinton. Remember this guy was a squeaky clean possible GOP candidate for President, and God only knows they needed someone next time better than the cast of characters they ran this year. Sadly not to be.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

  • Posted by ENMc none (My Page) on
    Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 17:48

Didn't anyone read bboy's post, up thread?

Why in the world would anyone bother in this thread? Or, any thread, for that matter. The OP is playing with you. It's what she does.

E


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Given this thread was about "theories".

My theory is that the Benghazi location was a home for CIA operatives and all communication with regards to what was happening there was through the CIA and went no further which is why Petraeus has really resigned. He did not inform his CIC of the events on the ground.

Security for the Benghazi site was in the hands of the CIA, not the State Department, and one of the reasons nothing much has been said by those in the "know" is because they were undertaking clandestine CIA operations there and they don't want that information "out there".

I think that the State Department had little or nothing to do with the Benghazi site.

The Ambassador was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

In the interest of full disclosure...I KNOW nothing.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Since we know Eric Holder knew back in the summer of the Petraeus Affair

How do you know this "for a fact"?


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Yah got a time line of evidence & information & you got BS players like the ones on this forum & in the Republican party playing down by the garden gate!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Posted by lily316 z5PA (My Page) on
Thu, Nov 15, 12 at 17:46

Demi is probably upset that one of her GOP heroes Petraeus was more egregious in his conduct that Clinton. Remember this guy was a squeaky clean possible GOP candidate for President, and God only knows they needed someone next time better than the cast of characters they ran this year. Sadly not to be.

*

Lily, why do you make those personal comments about me being "upset?" They're chiding, they are not nice and they have nothing to do with the topic.

Nope, Petraeus isn't any "hero" of mine I have had no particular opinion of him, personally, heretofore, now I have only a negative opinion of him.

Additionally, he is stupid because he's allowing Obama and the Obama administration to play him as a tool to distract from their failures.

*

Chase, your post makes no sense.
I have indicated that I think we deserve answers based on what we already KNOW.

I stated that, and went to the trouble to show you what we KNOW and how we know it, since you asked.

What's the problem?

*

Jerzeegirl, for a "fact" Eric Holder has not personally told me when he knew of the Petraeus affair.

However, multiple news organizations have reported that he knew in the summer about it.

What do you want? Holder writing it in blood?

It could still be a lie.

I guess you had to be there "for sure."

In that case, none of us here "KNOW" anything we talk about or post or quote because we do not have personal knowledge.

How ridiculous !


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Hey Ho lets get this piece of republican Hope for a future of chaos up to 150.
Jan Stevens had to ask Romney to stop using his son to get elected unfortunately the party faithful doesn't give a crap!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

we deserve answers based on what we already KNOW.

We already know that the Benghazi annex/consulate was a CIA cover, and that the CIA was supposed to supply protection to its employees.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Perhaps I'm just thick but I don't see how you answered my question of HOW you know what you think you know.

The only information you ,or any of us , have us is through a media filter. We have no idea of the facts

I also would appreciate you answering my question about how I was playing any game with you on this thread. I also suspect my post makes much sense since you refuse to answer my questions


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

You'd think by now that at least one of our resident 'conservative' foreign affairs experts could make a coherent case of this thing being a conspiracy, or 'splain - without cracking up the audience in peels of laughter - about how the administration 'lied' to the American people.


 o
re: benghazi gate - why now!!??!?

on our way to that blissful 150 posts


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

I am not playing any game.

If you are going to argue with me that what I posted as what we "know" and why is not a fact , then I can conversely argue with you that every statement you have ever made on this forum about anything that happened in the government is not a fact, either.

I KNOW what I heard Obama say, Chase, about the video, and on multiple occasions.

I don't know what else to say to you--but that these constant retorts to me about not proving any of these widely publicized reports and recordings of Obama and others I've seen and heard with my own eyes and ears are true, then it certainly seems to me you are playing games.

Perhaps you are just playing semantic games or we're not communicating.

I can assure you I have no reason to play any games, but this is just ridiculous.

Would you want me calling you out to PROVE every statement you've ever made on this forum about U.S. politics and tell you that you don't KNOW IT TO BE A FACT because you weren't personally there to see it take place?

That's ridiculous.

Have fun, I'm done with game playing, I have to go through my closet and get together clothes to give to the increased number of poor people we're going to have under Obama's administration.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

"Would you want me calling you out to PROVE every statement you've ever made on this forum"

If 90% + of the audience found it questionable, I think that you should question it.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

David, Repubs do not wants to see your chart. They have to get Obama, don't ya know. It is awful. They must KNOW now when they are going to bring Romney back so he can be PRESIDENT!

Those other Embassy deaths are unimportant just like these 4 that died are unimportant. They will continue to dance on their grave to get rid of Obama.


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

OH LOOK we made 150 this is important Horrraaaaay!


 o
RE: Benghazi Gate

Have fun, I'm done with game playing, I have to go through my closet and get together clothes to give to the increased number of poor people we're going to have under Obama's administration.

You're so generous.

-Ron-


 o Post a Follow-Up

Please Note: This thread has reached the upper limit for the number follow-ups allowed (150). If you would like to continue this discussion, please begin a new thread using the form on the main forum page.


Return to the Hot Topics Forum

Information about Posting

  • You must be logged in to post a message. Once you are logged in, a posting window will appear at the bottom of the messages. If you are not a member, please register for an account.
  • Please review our Rules of Play before posting.
  • Posting is a two-step process. Once you have composed your message, you will be taken to the preview page. You will then have a chance to review your post, make changes and upload photos.
  • After posting your message, you may need to refresh the forum page in order to see it.
  • Before posting copyrighted material, please read about Copyright and Fair Use.
  • We have a strict no-advertising policy!
  • If you would like to practice posting or uploading photos, please visit our Test forum.
  • If you need assistance, please Contact Us and we will be happy to help.


Learn more about in-text links on this page here