Political sleaze

I MISS Nixon at least he loved this country.

 

I am a (*)(*)(*)(*)ing libertarian. Members of the GOP including their presidential nominee in 2008 are complicit in the treason. You are debating whether to READ a post to have a debate based on flawed understanding of the poster and making the erroneous claim that you do not debate in partisan threads in a partisan thread.

Their facebook page proudly displayed the AQ salafist flag.

(Yes that is CNS news, but it is transcript from the video of the hearing. Finding a written transcript of Hicks is next to impossible outside of RW sources... still there is video to confirm.)

The interim report on this was much more specific and contained the actual verbiage of the email sent to the State Dept warning that Feb 17th had turned and no longer supported the US. It has been scrubbed from everywhere, but if you are curious that language and non-redacted recipients are in right-leaning CSN report here. I only mention it because I read the report the day of release, from senate.gov and know it to be accurate. Read the quotes and skip the op-ed.
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/mili...ments-benghazi

There. Now it is part of this thread which you have read. You have all the background you need.

Engage or (*)(*)(*)(*) off.

 

As I said, you may be a Libertarian, but you still argue like every other Conservative when their propaganda is ignored.

The "Engage or (*)(*)(*)(*) off" bit is just funny.

By the way, I can do this all day if you'd like.

 

It appears that it is all you can do.

[video=youtube;j-pSKooa7jo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-pSKooa7jo[/video]

Chicken (*)(*)(*)(*).

(*)(*)(*)(*) off.

 

I would like to point out that I have not once resorted to insulting you through profanity. In fact, the only profanity I have used in this thread was to emphasize that I will not be swept aside so cavalierly as you attempted to do.

 

Look at all my partisan rightwing mouthpiece sources

Sources

1. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/front...emen/understanding-yemens-al-qaeda-threat/#hb
2. http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/para/aden-abyan.htm
3. http://bigstory.ap.org/article/benghazi-power-libya-militia-eyed-attack
4. http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/06/w...-into-islamist-hands.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
5. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/15/world/africa/15libya.html?_r=0
6. http://www.france24.com/en/20120914...ate-benghazi-who-are-ansar-al-sharia-al-qaeda
7. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-19582810
8. http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/09/201292218380199890.html
9. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articl...l-sharia-militia-for-crime-fighting-help.html
10. http://sana.sy/eng/22/2012/09/14/441552.htm
11. http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/National/article1173125.ece
12. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...hink-the-cia-had-taken-prisoners-in-benghazi/
13. http://www.eurasiareview.com/09062012-an-arms-buyback-for-libya-analysis/
14. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-17402856
15. http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/glen-doherty-navy-seal-killed-libya-intel-mission/story?id=17229037
16. http://www.defensenews.com/article/...0009/U-S-Still-Hunting-Missing-Libyan-MANPADS
17. http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/africa/libya-attack-jihadists
18. http://www.longwarjournal.org/threa...ar_al_shariah_issues_statem.php#ixzz2TDObMfEk
19. http://www.libyaherald.com/2012/06/18/tunisian-consulate-in-benghazi-attacked/
20. http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/08/01/us-usa-syria-obama-order-idUSBRE8701OK20120801
21. http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/...7/Transcript-Testimony-Gregory-Hicks-Benghazi

The reason I appear to be partisan to you is because being a libertarian, naturally I am conservative... and partisan liberals such as yourself refuse to address the failures of this administration, and republicans (for obvious reasons) don't. No republican in my lifetime has done anything to shrink government.

You have 0 credibility. People on all sides afford me mine... because I am intellectually honest.

 

I do that when people lie to me.

There is nothing partisan in my post on the subject. You are just a liar.

(*)(*)(*)(*) off.

 

I have not once lied to you. I have pointed out the faulty logic in your posts, but I have not presented any falsehoods in this thread. You, however, have lied when you say you haven't presented partisan views in this thread.

I am not a partisan liberal by the plain fact that neither party has a view consistent with my own views. I have criticized the president in the past and will criticize the president in the future most likely.

Your credibility is tempered by your propensity to insult those with a differing view than yours. I embrace those who can look beyond their own views and see the intellect in their ideological opponents. I would believe many here would deem me more credible by this debate alone in that I have not once resorted to childish taunting to make a point.

 

I quoted your lie. You consider condemnation of this administration as partisan. There is no appropriate way, in your reason, to demonstrate legitimate condemnation.

You said:

This is active, the post is relevant to the level of corruption of this administration, and you were here from the start. I have shown my sources, I have presented the factual data of the conditions of the US arming and paying known terrorists. You don't just get to say "that's partisan propaganda" because it does not serve your partisan agenda.

Demonstrate that my post was partisan, or that my sources are propaganda. Failure to do so are lies number 2-3. I don't care what your "view" is. Your view is not reflective of your character... your actions are. You are a liar. Otherwise you would demonstrate, or engage.

*** Correction. This was lie number 2

The OP of this thread:

Your participation "in a discussion that is based on partisan versions of reality" in your own esteem:

So those will be lies 3 and 4. That is one per page so far.

Just so you know... I can do this all day.

 

Well you didnt link an source! Thread fail

 

Actually, when you go down the list of resignation, investigations, indictments and convictions, the George W Bush adminstration is the hand's down winner.

 

I'd be interested in that challenge. Lets see the list.
First 5 years please to be fair. It will be interesting to see which ends up MORE corrupt.

 

First may I point out that the libs here are trying to misdirect the thread by saying that other president were more corrupt than Obama. For the most part they had just one scandal. Obama already has at least FIVE.

Now please address the main point of the thread. Do you agree that Obama committing illegal acts by not following the obamacare law. His delaying the application of the obamacare law for political gain for the democrats is SLEAZY!!!!!!!!

 

Only if I can point out that the number of scandals a presidential administration has is irrelevant to the impact of those scandals. Besides, many modern scandals are politically motivated in the first place or if not politically motivated then blown into a much larger proportion by the opponents of a politician.

For example: people still whine about Benghazi despite the fact that it would have been next to impossible for the United States to have intervened to stop the deaths. Yes, there should have been an inquiry by Congress, but ex post facto wound-licking is of little consolation to those who died in Benghazi.

The IRS scandal was denounced by Obama himself, who demanded heads roll.

Fast and Furious. That one I will agree, Holder should have been impeached for perjury. However, the House of Representatives is loathe to impeach a sitting Cabinet official without a reasonable assurance that conviction by the Senate will be likely.

In no case so cited has there ever been probable cause to assume that the President was complicit in illegal acts or was even involved in those acts.

So what are the other two "scandals"?

If you want him to enforce Obamacare, then file a lawsuit in Federal court. Politicians do things for political gain, it is their nature. Instead of whining like a petulant child on an internet forum, keep him accountable to his word.

 

Here's an incomplete list of about a dozen, many of which were still ongoing. As we now know, not one of them turned out the way Bush hoped.

http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/001421.html

Now, to be fair, list the number of real investigations, resignation, indictments or resignations in the Obama adminstration to date.

 

This is a typical right wing dodge.

The poster made a very specific baseless claim, which he knows he can't back up with evidence.

When critics point out that the record clearly suggests that the Obama adminstration is nowhere near as corrupt as its immediate predecessor (a claim they CAN document) the wingers go back to whining that the liberal are trying to distract the theme by contradicting its core claim!!!!!!!

 

Now lets talk about the political sleaze of Obama trying to put off the effects of obamacare until after the 2014 elections.

 

As I said before, if you don't like it, file a federal lawsuit. Keep him accountable.

 

"Your throwing out the race card indicates that you have no logical response to my thread." logical not required on a thread this far from the truth.