54 total posts
(Page 1 of 2)
And now Peggy Noonan too
Graphic discription you've made there
Does it bring a smile to your face? War no longer brings out the worst in people. Politics does. What happened in the 1860s is a playground scuffle compared to how we fight amongst ourselves tover who should be in charge today. Very sad indeed.
Watching Romney self-destruct does bring a smile to my face.
I thought that attitude was generally reserved
for low life. I guess that's what you think of Romney. His real problem is that he's just too squeaky clean. The press must be frustrated at not finding any real dirt. No one likes the Donny Osmond type, do they?
That isn't his "real problem"
His real problem is that last night he impulsively made an accusation based on inaccurate information, and then today, instead of having the stones to admit he had made a mistake, doubled down and repeated the false statement even after having the inaccuracy of it brought to his attention.
He also defended his poorly-chosen comments by saying (paraphrasing), "Well, the White House issued a statement so I did too."
Yes, they did, because they are the government. That's their job.
He then went on to blame Obama for the "apology" issued by someone at the consulate (which Romney erroneously called an embassy), saying that diplomats "are the Administration" and that the president is responsible for anything anyone in his administration says. Interesting that he doesn't seem to apply that same level of responsibility to himself and the things that have been said by people connected to his campaign.
His other real problem is that he seems to have very little grasp of foreign policy, and even his own staffers have admitted that Obama has him beat there.
Another real problem is the increasing number of people in his own party who are distancing themselves from him.
Maybe you didn't notice or don't care
but what I saw was Romney commenting on White House remarks with Obama coming back with a criticism of Romney's person. There is a big difference between those types of responses but I also have learned much about human nature and how we will accept a negative attribute in one person while condemning it in another. I remember an expression of ridicule used during the Vietnam War by those who opposed it. The phrase, "My country, right or wrong" was used to mock supporters of the war. Today's paraphrase of it is "My candidate can do no wrong". But that's one thing I've noticed about Mitt Romney is that he doesn't tend to get personal in his remarks the way the president often does. Mean spirits we don't need. I also know that people don't like that Romney is wealthy even though Obama is in no way poor. Strangely it seems that Warren Buffet, though he makes Romney look no better off than a pan handler, gets a pass. Why?...because he's suggested that he should pay more taxes. He could easily pay 35% and still make Romney look like a pauper but, for some reason, Mitt gets bad mouthed for his financial success. Life just isn't fair, is it.
Romney was criticizing....
.....Obama's competence while our diplomats were still in the middle of a terrorist attack, and doing so based on incorrect information. He then refused to back down from those criticisms.
That's what I saw.
What sort of information
did Obama FAIL to act on BEFORE the attack? Research that one why don't you, then get back to us. Prepare to feel even more ashamed of Obama than Romney, by a long shot.
if you have some details to share, then share them
All is see from this comment is the usual casting of doubt with implied innuendo.
If you can't give details, then you are just wasting everyone's time.
do your homework
time to be weaned off the bottle.
Talk is cheap. In other words, you got nothing.
The teacher says
no homework, you get a big red "F"
please take this note home to your parents.
I read your reply
From now on, I'll just use an asterisk to let you know I saw your posts but have grown weary of trying to carry on a real conversation when you insist on being nonsensical and hyperbolic.
Have a good evening, James.
you should know by now
I reply "in kind" which means someone else always started it.
RE: I reply "in kind"
I reply "in kind" which means someone else always started it.
But not necessarily "started" in that thread...it could be something that happened more than 2 weeks ago. Once you're on the merry-go-round you're on it forever.
You mean you want him to do YOUR homework
You're the one suggesting there was negligence. Find and post evidence, like I did.
Homework done for you lazy bones.
According to senior diplomatic sources, the US State Department had credible information 48 hours before mobs charged the consulate in Benghazi, and the embassy in Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given for diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movement is severely restricted.
Mr Stevens had been on a visit to Germany, Austria and Sweden and had just returned to Libya when the Benghazi trip took place with the US embassy's security staff deciding that the trip could be undertaken safely.
"We've seen numerous reports now of a growing intelligence trail that this was a planned attack," said Richard Grenell, who served briefly as a national security spokesman for Mitt Romney and used to work for the U.S. ambassador to the U.N. under George W. Bush. Grenell questioned Obama's recent campaigns stops and media interviews in light of the tragedy.
State Department official reportedly told lawmakers Wednesday that he did think the assault was planned. And other lawmakers and analysts have reached the same conclusion. House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Rogers told Fox News shortly after the attack that it was clearly "coordinated." His account was backed up by a Libyan official Thursday who said it was a two-stage operation.
Sources close to U.S. President Barack Obama's administration revealed that White House officials apparently received warnings that there were threats made to attack as many as seven U.S. missions in the Middle East, on the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks, as early as September 4. Sources also revealed that additional warnings were received a few days later, with similar information, but that all of the warnings were largely ignored by the administration. Normally when such warnings are received by the administration, the threat level is raised at U.S. installations around the world. At this point, there is no evidence that the Obama administration communicated the warnings with Consular officials in Libya or Egypt in advance of attacks that took place Monday in Benghazi, Libya and Cairo, Egypt, leaving the U.S. Ambassador to Libya and three other Americans dead, with eight others wounded, including some U.S. military personnel.
On one hand, the administration has spent two days tying the attacks to outrage over a film that represents the prophet Muhammad in an unflattering manner, and on the other hand, having to acknowledge that administration officials had advance warnings of possible attacks, and that the administration largely ignored those same warnings. Senior diplomatic sources are now saying that the U.S. State Department had credible information 48 hours before the attacks in Benghazi and Cairo, that American missions may be targeted, but no warnings were given to diplomats to go on high alert and "lockdown", under which movements of embassy personnel are severely restricted.
RE: Homework done for you lazy bones.
It wasn't that difficult, was it, James?
You could have done that and put it in your post with your original claim as justification for your opinion.
Let's see, a gossip site, Fox News, two conservative "news" sites and for toppers, a doomsday "the end is nigh!" site.
I guess it's our fault; we asked for links but didn't specify that they shouldn't elicit laughter.
can't make up your mind, can you?
Ecclesiastes 7:6 For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool: this also is vanity.
Laughter of the fool
RE: "My candidate can do no wrong".
That's why the people chose
Barrabas instead of Christ. They love the evil when their own deeds are evil.
I can't blame anyone for paying as little taxes
as they legally can.
I can think it stinks that the more you have the more ways there are to legally avoid paying taxes on more portions of it.
My Country, Right or Wrong. Carl Schurz Civil War General.
Josh, what bring a smile...
Josh, what brings a smile to my face is the claim that somebody at the Embassy made that "apology" release to the public without being carefully instructed to do so. When you work for the Department of State, you don't release such things on your own.
Whoever sent that out was authorized to do so. The question is who authorized its release. It was an inappropriate thing to release at that time. Romney saw it and said so. Obama later agreed with that. It seems to me that all the anger at Romney saying it was that he said it first. Obama took longer, he had to get to Las Vegas for a fundraiser.
I wonder how much
the Hatch Act enters into all this?
Nah. The Civil War was the Agrarian South against the
Industrial North. The South was trying to keep special privileges, like Slavery, and extend it because they could see that the North was where the Immigrants were flocking to. They could see their influence waning, so they picked up their marbles and tried to remove their half of the house.
Nobody who cares about the United States could be happy with the current situation. But to describe it as a fight between parties is very wrong. Even though the Republican Party has been taken over by Corporations and the Wealthy and the hyper-Conservative minority, they don't represent the core values of Republicanism. They've just taken over a vulnerable political entity for their own purposes. We need a man with the intelligence of William Buckley and the spine of Dwight Eisenhower to wrench the party out of the hands of the Special Interests, and back into its proper function of representing a set of common values shared by a majority or near majority of American voters.
Republicans have become the puppets of a new Tamany Hall, a nation wide minority interest who pursue their agenda and corruption through fair means or foul, to the detriment of the country. How many Republicans have been caught with their hands in the till, like Randy Cunningham? Endless numbers. Democrats are equally prone to unethical behaviour, but not criminal facilitation of a minority interest, which describes the activity of the Republican Party since Reagan. Hell even Nixon looks good by comparison.
are you unware of the Black Codes in Northern States?
Setup to discourage immigration of blacks to the north. Illionois didn't even want them to sleep overnight in the state.
Also the war was based first on northern taxation of textiles sent South they'd made using tax free cotton from the south, for one.
They didn't start a war to have slavery, that already existed.
I heard a quote from a speech Romney gave today.
He was complaining about how Obama gave a speech about the economy, and then gave no detailed plans about how he (Obama) was going to fix it.
Romney complained about Obama giving no plan details in a speech?
The most detail Romney has given in his speeches so far has been "Me fix".
Honestly guys... can we get 4 more years of Bill Clinton?
Back to Speakeasy forum
(Page 1 of 2)