• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CBS News confirms multiple breaches of Sharyl Attkisson’s computer

As it happens, the people who are doing the lying to the American People are currently all of one party.

You see, the first sentence pretty much ends any attempt to have a reasoned debate.

But lie you do- FDR didn't sacrifice MacArthur's army, there was no way to reinforce nor withdraw his forces after Pearl.

just wanted to tag one HUGE lie to show it isn't just the left who can't get facts straight... :2wave:
 
the radical right has been DEMANDING arms to syrian rebels for months

LOL!

so, apparently, has susan rice, obama's new DIRECTOR OF NSA

http://www.politico.com/story/2013/06/president-obama-syria-chemical-weapons-92782.html

not to mention jfkerry and bubba clinton

so sure the IRS deal was something he signed off on

who's sure?

still, it's odd (it's actually impossible) that his cos and white counsel knew and he didn't

WaPo: White House senior aides knew details of IRS probe but didn’t tell Obama, spokesman says

and why can't he still state flatly when he learned what was going at his irs for 2 years?

Obama pushes back on IRS, AP, Benghazi - Jennifer Epstein - POLITICO.com

he read it in the newspaper?

stay tuned
 
That sounds highly partisan and very desperate hackery to me.

Your going to need a citation for sending arms for over a year as last report I see is just NOW he has agreed to send arms... oh and odd thing about that is the radical right has been DEMANDING arms to syrian rebels for months, what are you trying to say?

Now Irangate was selling arms to the very enemy Reagan used as a punching to get elected, THOUSANDS of AT missiles, then diverting those funds to defy a DIRECT Congressional order to arm right wing death squads in Central America- how is that even close to any of the above?

Sorry charlie, I realize desperate times call for desperate measures as the GOP guts itself for all the world to see, but more diplomats and staff died while Bush was in office, more warrantless actual wiretaps were done under Bush by his DIRECT presidential order so where was the Right Wing umbrage then??? :confused:

Now the point of remembering Irangate is the President Reagan claimed all that high level negotiations, money laundering, arms dealing went on for YEARS and the President didn't know??? 14 of his administration were indicted, 11 convicted ALL pardoned by X-CIA director, VP during the scandal and later President BushI.

So if ALL of that could possibly go on under Reagan and he apparently not know then why are some on the Radical Right so sure the IRS deal was something he signed off on. Fast and Furious was an abortion if the right can excuse using that term here, but not unlike dozens of other 'let's see where this leads' operations done by the FBI, DEA, and CIA.

But the Right Wing needs to make the dems look bad as trying to make themselves look good yields such gems as 'legitimate rape' and Christianity under attack... :roll:

You whine about "partisanship" and then post complete partisan hackery. You whine about links but then make broad-based outrageous statements without links.

We were running arms through Libya to Syria. It is why the ambassador was in Benghazi.

US Smuggling Weapons to Syrian Rebels: The real Benghazi story

There are 100's of stories on it, despite the Obama Admin trying to squash it everywhere, to include the topic of this thread. We do you think that NONE of the folks who were in Benghazi that night have been made available to the House and Senate committees ?

Liberals can't handle the truth.
 
Republicans shout that Democrats lie.
Democrats shout that Republicans lie.

Both of them are right.

And when they say that the other side lies, that is when they are telling the truth. The rest of the time, their statements are highly suspect.
 
Republicans shout that Democrats lie.
Democrats shout that Republicans lie.

Both of them are right.

And when they say that the other side lies, that is when they are telling the truth. The rest of the time, their statements are highly suspect.

And all these scandals are just business as usual, right ................... :roll:
 
You see, the first sentence pretty much ends any attempt to have a reasoned debate.

But lie you do- FDR didn't sacrifice MacArthur's army, there was no way to reinforce nor withdraw his forces after Pearl.

just wanted to tag one HUGE lie to show it isn't just the left who can't get facts straight... :2wave:


That was a stretch, but it was the only example I could think of in which the USA abandoned its own to certain death or defeat. By pointing that out, you seem to be making my case.
 
Then who and where should this be debated? Oh, I know let's bury it somewhere people won't hear about it at all.

I think the point he is making is that more debate happens in the breaking news section, due to the most important stories from mainstream media being posted there. It looks like he is on YOUR side here, as far as stating that more debate needs to be encouraged on this.
 
For the past few decades at least, yes, that is business as usual. So are politicians lying to the voters.

Many politicians lie because voters often prefer it to the truth, that this time it will be different. Sometimes people just want to believe, which is why lottery sales always do so well.
 
For the past few decades at least, yes, that is business as usual. So are politicians lying to the voters.

If scandals were only about politicians lying, then your post would have merit. But they aren't. And it doesn't.
 
If scandals were only about politicians lying, then your post would have merit. But they aren't. And it doesn't.

Do try to follow along, Deuce. Two separate but related issues were brought up.

Scandals and lying pols are nothing new, nor are they confined to one party.
 
Do try to follow along, Deuce. Two separate but related issues were brought up.

Scandals and lying pols are nothing new, nor are they confined to one party.

Do try to follow d-head. The issue with the scandals of the Obama Admin, and the clear violations of this reporters privacy, is not about politicians lying. Its about the Executive trashing the Constitution, and our inalienable rights.
 
Do try to follow d-head. The issue with the scandals of the Obama Admin, and the clear violations of this reporters privacy, is not about politicians lying. Its about the Executive trashing the Constitution, and our inalienable rights.

Oh, I quite agree.

To my post:

Republicans shout that Democrats lie.
Democrats shout that Republicans lie.

Both of them are right.

And when they say that the other side lies, that is when they are telling the truth. The rest of the time, their statements are highly suspect.

you answered:
And all these scandals are just business as usual, right ...................

to which I said something to the effect that they were, indeed, business as usual, as they have been happening for decades.

Not that the actions of government are OK, you understand, just that they are nothing new. Scandals are, in fact, business as usual.
 
Welcome to a world how progressives do things....Before in power, they railed against anything like this, once in power, they themselves will go far beyond anything they complained about in the past...IOW, the old axiom becomes truism...."What ever liberal progressives are complaining about, it is itself what they are doing."

We, have liars, and corrupt fools running this country now....


Ahh! It's certainly comforting to know that nothing has changed.
 
Do try to follow along, Deuce. Two separate but related issues were brought up.

Scandals and lying pols are nothing new, nor are they confined to one party.

Ok, so even if that is true, do you believe that is a reason to ignore those scandals happening now?
 
Ahh! It's certainly comforting to know that nothing has changed.

Is it comforting to you in a way that you would like everyone to go back to sleep? Or, is it possible that things would be better if everyone woke up and held this administration accountable? Or, #3, are you promoting the 'nothing to see here' tag as a way to defend the corrupt Obama administration?
 
Probably because most of that rant is ridiculous, however the director of the NSA/head of US Cyber Command, General Alexander was before the Senate this past Wednesday disputing some of Snowden's biggest's big brother claims. he also defended why secrecy was good but that the phone number surveillance program should be further explained to the American people. he said several terror plots have been thwarted due to the NSA programs.

Now some are kicking around another Oxcy Rush intellectual thief and that is amusing. The way I heard it the theory was the Reagan Theory of Deniability.

Back in 1984 there was a botched attempt to trade arms for 7 hostages held by Iran. Israel sent the TOW (2500) and HAWK (18 plus several shipments of spare parts) missiles to Iran and the USofA resupplied Israel. Col. North used the funds to get around the Boland Amendment that prohibited further funding for the Contras, at the time accused of having become little more than right wing death squads.

After the story broke large amounts of the scandal's documentation was destroyed hampering the investigation. There was a handwritten note from then SoD Wienberger saying President Reagan could answer charges of illegality on arms transfers but not for not attempting to free the hostages. Further evidence did point to Reagan knowing of a potential trade of weapons for hostages with 'moderate' elements in the Iran Government.

In 1987 Reagan went on TV to take full responsibility for actions he was supposedly unaware of and that what had been a 'strategic opening with Iran' had become just an arms for hostages deal. No charges against Reagan, 14 of his administration officials were indicted, 11 convicted, ALL pardoned in the last days of GHW Bush's Presidency. Bush, who had at one time been director of the CIA and the VP during the scandal, was never implicated.

The biggest share of the blame fell on the NSA with Director Admiral Poindexter saying he acted without Presidential approval. The shipments of arms had already started before the Admiral took over for McFarlane as NSA Director. At this time Ollie North in the National Security Counsel concocted a direct sales method using funds from the Sultan of Burnei among others, the plan was uncovered when Fawn Hall, Ollie's cute little secretary transposed secret Swiss bank account numbers and sent the funds to the wrong account, that account holder notified authorities of the 10 MILLION dollar error.

Leaks about the arms for hostages program didn't create near the fuss the downed plane load of arms for Contras did in Nicaragua. That ripped it wide open.

So there you have major arms sales to what was then a hated and much campaigned against enemy, Iran. Huge diversions of funds through secret account with CIA assistance to provide arms for a merc unit cut off from funding by Congress, it lasted at least 3 years and would have gone on longer but for leaks and mis-steps by secretaries, with everyone from the SoD, NSA, and the CIA involved.... some indication the President knew of at least PART of the Iran side of the deals...

But the President is held to not have know enough to be included in the indictments. :shock:

So Oxcy Rush stole the theorem from a few decades ago, typical- the guy has no original thoughts, and a MASSIVE series of arms deals were conducted without 'anyone' knowing for YEARS...

So Reagan knew nothing about the illegal parts of Irangate but Obama MUST know everything about whatever scandal the right is working on this week??? :confused:

Let's see how this lays out first, what I see is a desperate attempt to win back the Senate and not lose anymore seats in the House by the GOP at a time when they are knife fighting among themselves and very vulnerable. the right wing knows if the TeaBaggers go into full revolt and can win some primaries a repeat of the slaughter could happen again in both house and Senate, about the only insurance card the GOP leadership has is to attack the democrats as viciously and as widely as can be done.

And it appears done it shall be.

This is such a load of horse****, and you know it. If that were true, he wouldn't worth hundreds of millions.
 
Is it comforting to you in a way that you would like everyone to go back to sleep? Or, is it possible that things would be better if everyone woke up and held this administration accountable? Or, #3, are you promoting the 'nothing to see here' tag as a way to defend the corrupt Obama administration?


Or, GWBush, the first scumbag has been succeeded by Bushlite, or more of the same.
 
This is such a load of horse****, and you know it. If that were true, he wouldn't worth hundreds of millions.

Laughing, he makes his money in a tried and true method developed before he was born. Rant to the masses like Father Coughlin. There is a fool born every minute from PT Barnum, and a fool and his money are soon parted. Throw in a touch of Moa, tell a lie often enough.... tahhhh dahhh you have Oxcy rush, villifier of hollywierd types getting away with drug abuse and they should be hung I tell you , HUNG.... ahhh until he gets busted for Oxcy and then he does the EXACT same thing... personal responsibility my shiny hiney. :doh

He is just very good at ranting to the masses, his talent lies not in being original but in being absurd and that has a loooong list of those going before him. :peace
 
Or, GWBush, the first scumbag has been succeeded by Bushlite, or more of the same.

Just another way to minimize the scandals that THIS administration are responsible for...When will progressives ever get tired of running blocker, or apologist for this criminal in office today?

Look Dave, I am less concerned with what happened 5 to 12 years ago, and prefer to focus on the here and now. I know that a defender of liberty like yourself (tongue in cheek there) would agree that it doesn't matter as much what the last guy did, or didn't do, unless you want to use that to say that what is going on now is ok with you....And I know that such an honest guy like yourself would NEVER be so duplicitous as to defend any administration with such a weak assed argument like, "Well, the other guy did it too..."


:roll:
 
Laughing, he makes his money in a tried and true method developed before he was born. Rant to the masses like Father Coughlin. There is a fool born every minute from PT Barnum, and a fool and his money are soon parted. Throw in a touch of Moa, tell a lie often enough.... tahhhh dahhh you have Oxcy rush, villifier of hollywierd types getting away with drug abuse and they should be hung I tell you , HUNG.... ahhh until he gets busted for Oxcy and then he does the EXACT same thing... personal responsibility my shiny hiney. :doh

He is just very good at ranting to the masses, his talent lies not in being original but in being absurd and that has a loooong list of those going before him. :peace

Well, good to see that as a progressive you can hold true to the stereotype of attacking the messenger instead of arguing the message....:roll: Keep on putting that progressive tolerance on display for the people so that they can see for themselves it's all a load of crap.
 
Well, good to see that as a progressive you can hold true to the stereotype of attacking the messenger instead of arguing the message....:roll: Keep on putting that progressive tolerance on display for the people so that they can see for themselves it's all a load of crap.

Good to see so-called 'conservatives' take a direct response to another poster and twist it to be my point, which it wasn't. The guy I was responding to took HALF A SENTENCE from my post and made it the issue, so don't try and pin this on me. :doh

Keep up that sham of 'fair and balanced' like a typical 'conservative' so the rest of us can see the crap fest for what it is...

Context seems to be a too big a word for some 'conservatives'.... :roll:
 
Good to see so-called 'conservatives' take a direct response to another poster and twist it to be my point, which it wasn't. The guy I was responding to took HALF A SENTENCE from my post and made it the issue, so don't try and pin this on me. :doh

Keep up that sham of 'fair and balanced' like a typical 'conservative' so the rest of us can see the crap fest for what it is...

Context seems to be a too big a word for some 'conservatives'.... :roll:

Ok, so enlighten us all....What is the point of referring to a political opponent using a pejorative name to describe who you are talking about, after the man has admitted years ago his problem, receiving treatment for the problem, and being a success. If Limbaugh were some drug addled hooker, that got through rehab, and went on welfare roles for the rest of her life, she'd be a hero to you. But since you don't like political opponents, instead making an argument, you use vitriol, name calling, and childish simplistic crap to argue....You don't make any points, you just attack...That isn't debate, that is just plain immature.
 
Back
Top Bottom