It was?Originally Posted by Mr Earl
In the words of the immortal Myron Cohen "everyone's got to be someplace".
It was?Originally Posted by Mr Earl
In the words of the immortal Myron Cohen "everyone's got to be someplace".
^What is Obama's job again? POTUS. The country was under attack.
Apparently he wasn't doing his job.
^And what does his location have to do with this? Your point was about his location. He's not a drill press operator is he?
^then we would know what he a was doing. His location was well publicized when he invaded Pakistan and assassinated OBL.
But what was he doing exactly about the terrorist attack on Benghazi? It's in his job description to deal with such crises. If he wasn't doing his job, what was he doing?
So, somehow his location determines if he was doing something that meets some bar you have set for engagement? Strange obsession you exhibit here Earl. What should his location have been? You are making the assumption that he was not handling the crisis appropriately because he was in a location that you have not been made aware of. Very odd.
I guess he should have donned his Ironman costume and flown off to Libya to deliver a knock out punch to those nasty villains himself. Funny, the cartoonish image the right has about such things are handled.Originally Posted by Boon Mee
SFA is what he was doing other than blaming it all on that video.
You see, Earl, this is something the Libs are having a real hard time getting their little heads around. Obama is, always was and will be - a loser.
Ran across a real succinct explanation for the 'Progressives' angst:
"Three serial shocks (and their continuing aftershocks) are sufficiently grave to produce a form of trauma in those who hitched their hearts to Obama:
1. Facing proof from one of their own that Obama and his administration lied and then continued to lie to the faces of the White House Press Corps through Jay Carney about Benghazi casts serious doubt on other claims of his they have supported and defended;
2. Continuing revelations of the IRS's misbehavior toward the hated tea partiers and conservatives calls into question which side are the good guys (see point 1);
3. And finally the revelation that all their loyalty bought them no consideration at all when it came to secretly grabbing records of their communications in AP, tells them loyalty is one way street with this guy and his crowd."
A Deplorable Bitter Clinger
In line with fairness, we need a pic of Obama when the Benghazi attack took place.
Where he was and what he was doing will clearly show if he was doing his job as POTUS.
Apparently you have your head in the sand too. The failure to answer the question of what Obama was doing that night, and the subsequent whitewash blame America for the attack only further indicates how out of control the Federal Government had been and currently is still running wild with next to no accountability.
Very odd anyone in his right mind would subscribe to such abuse of power.
Last edited by Mr Earl; 17-05-2013 at 10:06 AM.
I thought you asked where he was? Now you seem to be swatting everywhere Earl. Still hoping something will stick?Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Why don't you give us a list of possible locations that prove abuse of power to you.
In your laudable efforts to be 'fair & balanced' here Norton, the comparison between what Dubya was doing at that kids school many miles from Big White really doesn't have any bearing to the question Earl is posing.
News reports were coming in from Benghazi, the Consulate was under attack and Barry slinks off to bed.
Last edited by Boon Mee; 17-05-2013 at 10:22 AM.
Obtuseness doesn't travel here. Where he was and what he was doing that night are relevant whether or not he was doing his job.
The subsequent Ambassador Rice blame America whitewash narrative on the Sunday talk shows was an outrage to anyone with a brain. Since Obama himself perpetuated this narrative in front of the UN, we must assume he's behind it. He is the the commander in chief after all is said and done. He should take responsibility for the misleading of the public.
Absolutely, so I must insist that you refrain from it in all your future posts. And please add stupidity and obfuscation to the list.Originally Posted by Mr Earl
Well, awfully sorry to launch an ad-hominen attack on a certain group of people with a certain political outlook, but the same bunch of people that believe everything about Benghazi is a concerted cover up, are the same bunch of people telling you/us to believe this, just a few short years ago-
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
"We do know, with absolute certainty, that [Saddam Hussein] is using his procurement system to acquire the equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon."
"Mohamed Atta, who was the lead hijacker, did apparently travel to Prague on a number of occasions. And on at least one occasion, we have reporting that places him in Prague with a senior Iraqi intelligence official a few months before the attack on the World Trade Center."
Case Dismissed. Prosecution lacks credible witlesses.
presumably he was in bed, as i believe it took place at 2:00 ESTOriginally Posted by Mr Earl
Originally Posted by Mr Earl
i assume you felt the same way during....
Last edited by raycarey; 17-05-2013 at 11:01 AM.
Seems the Republicans have been caught out misrepresenting what those White House e-mails actually stated regarding the State Department "cover up". Oops.
WH Benghazi emails have different quotes than earlier reported - CBS News
Indeed it's plain stupid, especially after recent testimony from Gregory Hicks and others who were on the ground that night, not to see the attack in Benghazi as a terrorist attack as the original CIA report said. It's even more idiotic to refuse to see the subsequent coverup involving Ambassador Rice as the mouthpiece for the blame America narrative. Lies from the State dept and the White House make it impossible to not see.
It simply boggles the mind how any sensible person can subscribe to these outrages.
Especially when you factor in the ongoing IRS/AP/DOJ scandals.
It looks like the 'benghazi emails' are another right wing blogosphere hoax, this being very much the stock in trade of Breitbart & Daily Caller in particular.
It doesn't matter to them you see- it's only about stoking bubba's sense of helplessness and racial entitlement, and directing his frustration to all the wrong places.
The fact that it leaves them looking like fools, and lands the middle ground straight into the waiting arms of the Democrats, does not appear to factor in their equation.
So the GOP is pretty much assured of the monkey vote- now all they have to do is change the average American into a simian.
Consulates are not normally sovereign territory unless they are sharing a building with an embassy.Originally Posted by Mr Earl
^^If they had any sense at all, they would take a look at how they have been mislead and move on to something of importance.
Already been whipped into a frenzy and can't disengage.
What is a U.S. Embassy?U.S. embassies and consulates abroad, as well as foreign embassies and consulates in the United States, have a special status. While diplomatic spaces remain the territory of the host state, an embassy or consulate represents a sovereign state.
It's unlikely Thai Military could march into the US consulate in Chiang Mai without a serious shit-storm taking place.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)