A Canadian conservative is one who believes in limited government and that the government should stay out of our wallets and out of our bedrooms.
The other problem is the 'issue' if there was ever one was limited to the initial statements about the causes of the attack, and that for some period of DAYS the Administration mischaracterized the motives of the attackers. Does anyone even today know their motives? I've never seen evidence that is conclusive. But let's say we knew their motives immediately or within a day or so, and it was NOT about a video but about something else which we're still not certain of and certainly didn't know at the time, but NOT, NOT the video!! We had many attacks on U.S. facilities abroad and pretty much no one cared why before, but OK, that's a fair issue during a bare fisted political campaign. The problem is we're now 2+ years past the campaign ending, Romney lost and yet we've had non-stop bogus allegations, rumors, accusations, and it was ALL crap. They even included the shameful accusation that the Obama admin, and the U.S. military, and the CIA, left those people to die for presumably political reasons.
So to say after all that the GOP didn't intend from day ONE to make this political is just an exercise in living in an alternate universe.
"Would you like a little pat on the head before I go with a promise I'll be back?"
Once more, you are resorting to dishonesty in your posts. I clearly indicated I would return eventually to respond to whatever nonsense you were going to post. I only included that because of your absurd contention that not replying within an arbitrarily set amount of time meant I was hiding.
The fact you have no choice but to resort to posts with provably false statements shows you know how wrong you are. You're not even trying to hide the fact you were wrong, but rather now have resorted to dishonestly omitting words from a post which show the true meaning of my statements.
No, it's called "having something to do besides sit on a computer".When someone doesn't respond to a direct challenge and leaves, that's considered running away.
Perhaps you have no life, but most of us have things we have to do. It must be nice not to have a life which requires you to step away from a computer, but unfortunately, we all don't have such a luxury.
Yes, some of us do. Unfortunately, I'm the only one in this conversation who seems to possess it.Some of us have superior intelligence
Then why did you deliberately omit the context which showed I wasn't running away and would reply to your post when I returned?and can actually review words in context
There's a real level of dishonesty to claim to be able to review words in context in the same post you deliberately omit context.
I'm not calling you a liar, I'm proving your posts are full of lies. There's a difference.But do continue calling me a liar
It's what someone with integrity would do when they are definitively proven to be wrong. Lying is what someone does when, after having proven to be wrong, they continue to knowingly post false statements.and then demanding that I apologize
You should apologize for making your provably false statements. You haven't.
I haven't lied once. Nothing Clinton said blamed anything on Republicans or "the right", while Republicans were blaming Obama before the bodies were cold. I never said I was running away. The only one who has posted lies has been you and I have proven it.for your lies
Horse sense is the thing a horse has which keeps it from betting on people. ~W.C. Fields
Exactly.When Romney releases a statement with the word "disgraceful" before he CAN know a damn thing about what actually happened and why is really all the proof one needs. He couldn't even wait till the next morning to start making it a desperation attempt to turn around a losing campaign.
There's no excusing the faults which led up to the attack, nor can there be a question this was a black eye for a President who was running hard on his foreign policy experience (whether it should have been or should not have been a black eye for him can be disputed, but there's no disputing is was going to be). But when people try to absolve the Republicans of their responsibility for turning Benghazi into a political issue, and excuse their continuous attempts to exploit the deaths of Americans, then that's when I have a problem.
It's what so many Republicans have chosen to do since the day Obama took office. I have no love for Democrats, but Republicans have been borderline insane for the last 6 years.So to say after all that the GOP didn't intend from day ONE to make this political is just an exercise in living in an alternate universe.