- Joined
- Jun 21, 2012
- Messages
- 2,655
- Reaction score
- 942
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Left
In spring 2001, the secondary hijackers began arriving in the United States.[155]
Bush wasn't President in spring of 2001?
I thought you caught on to your mistake. I thought you edited it to 'fix' it. You were right about the date but then INSIST they arrived AFTER Bush's inauguration.
So...who did your parents vote for in that all important presidential election of November 1999?
It is sickening and disgusting to watch Romney trying to use a terrible event like this to score political points since he is falling farther behind in the polls.
Justice says this will continue to blow up in his face as independent voters throw up at his self serving shameless antics.
In spring 2001, the secondary hijackers began arriving in the United States.[155]
Bush wasn't President in spring of 2001?
Go back to the initial question. When did the hijackers first arrive. Who was president? When did they begin terrorist school training? Who ignored intel reports? They arrived in January of 2000...but you just HAD to make that on Bush's watch...right? So you stuck to the Bush inauguration...of 2000...no matter HOW hard I tried to help you you just kept on with the foolishness...because...well...you couldnt help yourself...right? So...now...well...the SECONDARY hijackers...the muscle guys...yeah...yeah...THATS what you meant.In spring 2001, the secondary hijackers began arriving in the United States.[155]
Bush wasn't President in spring of 2001?
This is an idiotic line of thinking....yes Bush was President in 2001, but let's go back further, what made these people so mad to begin with as to even want to do something like this? We can take it all the way back to the Revolution, ultimately ending in the moronic conclusion that if we had just lost the revolution, we would not have to deal with this -- therefore if is all the fault of the founding fathers.
Sandy Berger was on a show this mornign talking about this...how...yes...Clinton did it...and Bush did it...and of course Obama did it when he was campaigning...but really guys...this has to stop today. Because...its not fair...Kind of like Obama did in 2008?
Romney is hardly down and out in any poll -- and in some he is leading. The race is hardly decided. The story will change quickly enough on Romney's handling of the event, and will ultimately boil down to the diaster that our foreign policy has been over the last four years -- something that will hurt the President.
I was simply responding to VanceMack's idiotic notion that somehow we need to blame Clinton, where Bush ought to get off scot-free.
I'm not a Clinton partisan; I have no problem blaming him for some security lapses. Bush should shoulder at least an equal share of the blame, however.
Obviously you didnt follow the conversation very well and then in the process exposed yourself as an idiot no matter how many times I tried to help you.I was simply responding to VanceMack's idiotic notion that somehow we need to blame Clinton, where Bush ought to get off scot-free.
I'm not a Clinton partisan; I have no problem blaming him for some security lapses. Bush should shoulder at least an equal share of the blame, however.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton took strong steps Thursday to distance the U.S. government from the movie, calling the film “disgusting and reprehensible” but also condemning the violence in response to it.
“The U.S. government has absolutely nothing to do with this video. We absolutely reject its content and messages,” Clinton said. “But there is no justification — none at all — for responding to this video with violence.”
“Now, I know it is hard for some people to understand why the United States cannot or does not just prevent these kinds of reprehensible videos from ever seeing the light of day,” Clinton said. “Even if it were possible, our country does have a long tradition of free expression, which is enshrined in our Constitution and our law. And we do not stop individual citizens from expressing their views, no matter how distasteful they may be.”
Sandy Berger was on a show this mornign talking about this...how...yes...Clinton did it...and Bush did it...and of course Obama did it when he was campaigning...but really guys...this has to stop today. Because...its not fair...
When you have PEGGY NOONAN saying Romney "didn't do himself any favors" and that he "looked weak", one ought to reconsider defending Romney on this gaff.
More of your self-reinforcing narrative. No one who was going to vote for Romney will now refuse to because he called Obama on his weak-kneed stance to a foreign policy disaster. And every one of those so-called republican strategists has said that the content was absolutely correct, just that he should have waited 12-24 hours to say it.
It's not a "gaff" in any sense, what Romney said was correct. When Obama addresses other nations he goes weak in the knees and amatuerish.
So you know more about it than Peggy Noonan, the most famous neo-conservative hawk in the Reagan Administration?
Impressive.
And, actually, there are lots of libertarian-leaning Republicans who just might not vote for Romney if he keeps up this level of bellicosity.
The answer is yes. Noonan sold her soul long ago and anything that has come out of her mouth since has been bought and paid for. She's not a "neo-conservative", she a paid pundit and will occupy any political space she thinks she can command attention in.
But that's moot. The absurd original point, that this would cost Romney voters that were already Romney voters is what I was addressing.
Ah, I see. She's "bought" because she doesn't agree with your perception of the situation.
I know of a few libertarian Republicans who aren't going to vote for Romney because of his promise to escalate the militarism of the last two Administrations.
Romney is hardly down and out in any poll -- and in some he is leading. The race is hardly decided. The story will change quickly enough on Romney's handling of the event, and will ultimately boil down to the diaster that our foreign policy has been over the last four years -- something that will hurt the President.
I posted this on another thread, but it really needs to be watched and listened to:
Sorry libs you're not going to be able to shift the narrative with projection
Obama apologized as our flag burned, our citizens were murdered, and a black al qaeda flag was was raised in it's place
This was a coordinated attack on 9/11. Obama is a disgrace not fit to be president
Romney's handling of this scenario was somewhat poor -- but what he said has plently of validity, and no one seems to want to talk about that.
Let's be real -- why was the embassy commenting on the video at all? The role of an embassy is to be a voice for our interests abroad. The US government (which includes embassies) should never comment on a video like this. Period. It makes no sense. There are plently of examples of horrible affronts to Christianity, but it would be idiotic to expect the government to come out and make a statement about freedom of religion. The only scenario when they should is if the government made the video -- which they obviously did not.
The last four years have been a disaster in the Middle East (and frankly Europe, and Asia) for the United States. The foreign policy trajectory we are on is pathetic -- and that all gets glossed over because Gov. Romney made his statement in a poor fashion....fine...but the real issues are still there -- and still being ignored, to our own detriment.
Look at tonight's NBC NEWS/MARIST polls - Obama with big leads in Ohio, Virginia and Florida.
I read your post and it is simply proof how out of touch with the American people the right is.
They do indeed show the President with a lead in those states -- but they do not show Gov Romney as a lost cause or in an unwinnable scenario -- it is after all still early -- and the debates will have an impact.
Care to elaborate?
The only validity in what Romney said is the same thing Obama said, see my above post about what the problem with Romney was.
Why did the embassy post that? I don't know maybe because they knew things were about to get out of hand?
I don't see the point in raking people over the coals whose lives were possibly in danger at the moment they made that post.
It's easy to play American badass over here in the comfort of the U.S., not so easy when there are people outside screaming "death to America" while holding rpg's.
Sure - I suspect the average American is NOT willing to attack the President of the USA over this issue the way Romney and his supporters are so willing to do. That is you out of touch misjudgment.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?