View Poll Results: Is obama an illegitimate president

Voters
81. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes he was elected based on a lie

    19 23.46%
  • no he was fairly elected

    62 76.54%
Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 163

Thread: Is obama an illegitimate president?

  1. #71
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Behind the Orange Curtain
    Last Seen
    01-30-15 @ 01:29 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    15,633

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gathomas88 View Post
    The POTUS might very well be a pathological liar. Then again, however; what politican isn't?
    Jimmy Carter ?

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Charleston, South Carolina
    Last Seen
    12-02-16 @ 01:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    28,659

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by APACHERAT View Post
    Jimmy Carter ?
    True, but one generally requires some degree of latent intelligence in order to be a successful liar.

    Carter.... Well, let's just say that this has never been his strong suit.

  3. #73
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,914
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by polgara View Post
    Good evening, Pero.

    : Many mistakes were made that day.

    That, however, still does not answer the question of why our people did not receive the assistance they pleaded for... that never came. That's the question that most people want the answer to!
    Strange as it may seem, that question doesnít bother me as much as why the administration tried to make the American people believe the well planned attacked by terrorist was the work of a video.

    I can understand not sending in the 4 SF troopers armed with only .45ís or perhaps 9 mmís against an attack force of what, 100? More? Less? I donít know, I havenít heard of a number assigned to the attackers. But we do know the attackers were armed with mortars and Ak-47ís. I can understand not sending them in, especially outgunned as they were. As for the aircraft based in Italy, could they have made it or not, it seems they might have before the second attack. But was it assumed that once the first attack was over, the engagement was finished? That is usually the pattern in attacks like these. I donít know, but these things are judgment calls.

    I have stated in the past about State being notorious for lax security, nothing new there. But this time it cost the Ambassador and others their lives. PBBauer in one of his posts defending the president said the reason the administration or the State Department okayed or wanted to blame everything on the video was State was afraid Congress would criticize State for lax security. Now that actually makes sense to me as I have personally seen the lax security State practices in the past.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  4. #74
    Sage
    Moot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Utah
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:43 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    27,460

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by sawyerloggingon View Post
    Yes all politicians lie to get elected but this was more than a lie it was a cover up and as the facts come out it is far worse than Watergate which forced Nixon to resigns so in my honest opinion the election is invalid. I realize I am in the minority here but what else is new.
    Baloney. The facts came out before the election and instead of impeachment, Obama was re-elected.

    When the likes of Darrell Issa rebuffs McCain's call for more investigations, it's a good sign the "cover up" conspiracy theory is starting to unravel from lack of evidence.

    But McCain's call was brushed off by fellow Republican Representative Darrell Issa, who chairs the House of Representatives Oversight and Government committee that heard from Hicks last week.

    "You know, let's not blow things out of proportion. This is a failure, it needs to be investigated. Our committee can investigate," Issa said....read

    Republican expects more Benghazi whistle blowers | Reuters
    The article goes on to say that Issa's committee want to interview Mullen and Pickering "in private" and from what Pickering has been vociferously saying in public, I seriously doubt there will be many more witnesses or investigations on Benghazi after that interview. Which means the witch hunt may be finally coming to an end.

  5. #75
    Guru
    Morality Games's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Iowa
    Last Seen
    05-24-16 @ 10:00 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    3,733

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    During both Clinton and Bush it was admitted right up front they were terror attacks. This one wasn't. This one was known by one and all that it was a terrorist attack, yet an attempt was made to kept that from the American people. In something like this, honesty is always the best policy. If the present administration had came right out and said Benghazi was a terrorist attack, none of what is happening now would be happening, even in today's highly partisan atmosphere.
    I'm not sure anyone admitted anything the way you described because I don't think anyone noticed or cared about those embassy attacks. They got written off as diploamtic/strategic setbacks and were consigned to become footnotes of history.

    If the Obama Administration stumbled when the whole point of the witch hunt was to make them stumble so Romney could be president, I still don't see why it is a reason to care about a fight between two sides that have proven equally unwilling to respect the dead in light of political opportunities/setbacks.
    Last edited by Morality Games; 05-13-13 at 04:15 AM.
    If you notice something good in yourself, give credit to God, not to yourself, but be certain the evil you commit is always your own and yours to acknowledge.

    St. Benedict

  6. #76
    Sage
    Hatuey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    42,018

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    The OP begins with the premise that the US electoral system is comparable to the International Cycling Organization (ICO). My heart tried to see it from a genuine "feels" perspective, then my brain jumped out of my skull and screamed at my heart:

    I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK

  7. #77
    Educator
    CaptinSarcastic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Last Seen
    07-18-16 @ 03:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,199

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    During both Clinton and Bush it was admitted right up front they were terror attacks. This one wasn't. This one was known by one and all that it was a terrorist attack, yet an attempt was made to kept that from the American people. In something like this, honesty is always the best policy. If the present administration had came right out and said Benghazi was a terrorist attack, none of what is happening now would be happening, even in today's highly partisan atmosphere.
    I know you don't want to hear this, but a spontaneous attack does not preclude a terrorist attack.

    Yes, the administration initially asserted that that the spontaneous attack was precipitated by the video, and that is almost certainly wrong, or at least there is no evidence that it is is right, but there seems to be this bifurcation between the initial characterization of who did the attacking and terrorists.

    If Osama bin Laden had walked into a bar to have a goats milk White Russian and saw a Saturday Night Live skit making fun of him and pulled a pistol and shot ten people, would that be a terrorist attack or a spontaneous reaction to a video?

    I'm not saying the characterization was right, or even that it was not politically motivated, but I guess what am saying is what difference, after all, does it make?

    I would probably agree with you if the administration had someone managed to tightly wrap this up until after the election, but we knew all of this within days of the attack. It was debated in the debates!

    Or is the idea that it even went in this direction for any period of time, even if it really was just in the immediate aftermath when there probably were people who actually and honestly thought the video was a factor?

    I guess I am more upset by political gamesmanship (okay, lying) when it is a long drawn out act of obfuscation than when the early facts are inaccurate, intentionally, or not.

    Do you remember Tora Bora?

    I am not bringing this as "Bush did it" thing, more like a "this is what political government is" thing.

    The whole Bush Administration came out to the Sunday talk circuits and said variations of UBL wasn't there. Singing from the same hymnal, Bush, Vice President Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former CENTCOM Commander Gen. Tommy Franks have all insisted: "We didn't know if bin Laden was at Tora Bora." He was they knew it, the CIA confirmed it, but it was politically expedient to say he wasn't there because the alternative was admitting we had him cornered and screwed it up.

    We never got all that mad about that because the denials persisted all the way past the 2004 election and when we learned the facts were unequivocal at the time, it was old news.

    But we knew the essential facts of Benghazi within days and the WH did not deny them.

    Sure, dig deep enough and there is some level of obfuscation, but seriously, the focus on the characterization that lasted a few days is just ridiculous and I know why the party faithful are hitting this dead horse with the paddles, but I am surprised you are buying any of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I do not believe any amount of people committing suicide with firearms justifies requiring firearm sellers to preach to customers about suicide regardless if it would or wouldn't save those who commit suicide.

  8. #78
    Educator
    CaptinSarcastic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Last Seen
    07-18-16 @ 03:35 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Moderate
    Posts
    1,199

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Perotista View Post
    Strange as it may seem, that question doesn’t bother me as much as why the administration tried to make the American people believe the well planned attacked by terrorist was the work of a video.

    I can understand not sending in the 4 SF troopers armed with only .45’s or perhaps 9 mm’s against an attack force of what, 100? More? Less? I don’t know, I haven’t heard of a number assigned to the attackers. But we do know the attackers were armed with mortars and Ak-47’s. I can understand not sending them in, especially outgunned as they were. As for the aircraft based in Italy, could they have made it or not, it seems they might have before the second attack. But was it assumed that once the first attack was over, the engagement was finished? That is usually the pattern in attacks like these. I don’t know, but these things are judgment calls.

    I have stated in the past about State being notorious for lax security, nothing new there. But this time it cost the Ambassador and others their lives. PBBauer in one of his posts defending the president said the reason the administration or the State Department okayed or wanted to blame everything on the video was State was afraid Congress would criticize State for lax security. Now that actually makes sense to me as I have personally seen the lax security State practices in the past.
    Without good intel, there is also the potential for something akin to sniper baiting. Draw in more targets and kill them.

    AFAIK, we are not fond of sending anyone, anywhere, blind.
    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I do not believe any amount of people committing suicide with firearms justifies requiring firearm sellers to preach to customers about suicide regardless if it would or wouldn't save those who commit suicide.

  9. #79
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,914
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by Morality Games View Post
    I'm not sure anyone admitted anything the way you described because I don't think anyone noticed or cared about those embassy attacks. They got written off as diploamtic/strategic setbacks and were consigned to become footnotes of history.

    If the Obama Administration stumbled when the whole point of the witch hunt was to make them stumble so Romney could be president, I still don't see why it is a reason to care about a fight between two sides that have proven equally unwilling to respect the dead in light of political opportunities/setbacks.
    Admitted is the wrong word. All were terrorist attacks under Clinton and Bush and no attempt was made to redefine them as something they were not. The Terrorist Attack happened and were reported as such. Here, Benghazi it seems for what ever unfathomable reason a decision was made to make this one particular terrorist attack, to report this terrorist attack as a protesting mob that went bad caused by a video instead of what it was. It was a well planned out terrorist attack which even the organization that caused it was know to the CIA and to State and reported up the chain of command. I'd like to know why some people in this administration tried to cover up the fact it was a terrorist attack. They may have had a valid reason or it may have been purely political. As of today, I am very much tilted to the political side.

    If any side is not respecting the dead, it is the administration in their attempt to call this terrorist attack something it was not. These people died in a terrorist attack and not as a result of a video mob gone bad. I hope you can see the difference.

    This is not really new, previously the Ft. Hood attack/killings by Major Hasan has been classified as work place violence by this administration when it was a terrorist attack by Hasan on his fellow soldiers. This too was not Hasan going postal which is the category the Ft. Hood Event is now resting it, it was a well thought out plan by Hasan to kill as many soldiers as he possibly could. The dead and wounded deserve the purple heart which would be awarded to them if this was classified as a terrorist attack, as a man who went postal and classified as work place violence, these soldiers do not receive the proper recognition they deserve.

    I am sure both sides are playing political games when they shouldn't when it comes to Benghazi. But only one side as it stands now looks like they tried to made something seem like it was something it wasn't and in the process tried to deceive the American People.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

  10. #80
    Sage
    Perotista's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:22 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,914
    Blog Entries
    24

    Re: Is obama an illegitimate president?

    Quote Originally Posted by CaptinSarcastic View Post
    I know you don't want to hear this, but a spontaneous attack does not preclude a terrorist attack.

    Yes, the administration initially asserted that that the spontaneous attack was precipitated by the video, and that is almost certainly wrong, or at least there is no evidence that it is is right, but there seems to be this bifurcation between the initial characterization of who did the attacking and terrorists.

    If Osama bin Laden had walked into a bar to have a goats milk White Russian and saw a Saturday Night Live skit making fun of him and pulled a pistol and shot ten people, would that be a terrorist attack or a spontaneous reaction to a video?

    I'm not saying the characterization was right, or even that it was not politically motivated, but I guess what am saying is what difference, after all, does it make?

    I would probably agree with you if the administration had someone managed to tightly wrap this up until after the election, but we knew all of this within days of the attack. It was debated in the debates!

    Or is the idea that it even went in this direction for any period of time, even if it really was just in the immediate aftermath when there probably were people who actually and honestly thought the video was a factor?

    I guess I am more upset by political gamesmanship (okay, lying) when it is a long drawn out act of obfuscation than when the early facts are inaccurate, intentionally, or not.

    Do you remember Tora Bora?

    I am not bringing this as "Bush did it" thing, more like a "this is what political government is" thing.

    The whole Bush Administration came out to the Sunday talk circuits and said variations of UBL wasn't there. Singing from the same hymnal, Bush, Vice President Cheney, former Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and former CENTCOM Commander Gen. Tommy Franks have all insisted: "We didn't know if bin Laden was at Tora Bora." He was they knew it, the CIA confirmed it, but it was politically expedient to say he wasn't there because the alternative was admitting we had him cornered and screwed it up.

    We never got all that mad about that because the denials persisted all the way past the 2004 election and when we learned the facts were unequivocal at the time, it was old news.

    But we knew the essential facts of Benghazi within days and the WH did not deny them.

    Sure, dig deep enough and there is some level of obfuscation, but seriously, the focus on the characterization that lasted a few days is just ridiculous and I know why the party faithful are hitting this dead horse with the paddles, but I am surprised you are buying any of it.
    I do not mind hearing everyone’s point of view and at times I have been known to change my mind. There is not D or R next to my name, I once belonged to the Reform Party and I still claim that party as mine.

    You are correct, a spontaneous attack does not preclude a terrorist attack. We would call this targets of opportunity and they are not really spontaneous in a sense, it is just taking advantage of a situation that presents it self in according to an over all plan. But with mortars being used, although a possibility, not very likely. The fact the CIA reported who was involved and knew it was terrorist which seems to have been changed by the State Department or at least deleted and a false report given to the American people, if not false as in an down right lie, at least to deceive the American people into thinking terrorist had nothing to do with it.

    The up coming election is irrelevant to me, I didn’t care who won, I wanted neither. I think PBBauer probable had it right in one of his posts in defending Obama. He said the terrorist portions were deleted to avoid congressional criticism over lax security by State. Now this makes sense as State is/was notorious for lax security at least back in my day.

    Sometimes governments/administrations lie on purpose or obfuscate or play very loose with the truth in trying to protect some things that deal with national security. Protecting an intelligence asset, ongoing operations, things of this nature. This is possible here, but I highly doubt it. I seen some of these things in action.

    The thing with me I would like to find out the reason why. I see no benefit to this administrations in trying to portray this event was the result of a video instead of coming right out with the truth when the truth was known. I am not trying to crucify anyone, I am just trying to make sense of something that so far in my mind makes no sense. But governments/administrations do things all the time that makes no sense out of fear of political repercussions or some bad press for a day or two.
    This Reform Party member thinks it is high past time that we start electing Americans to congress and the presidency who put America first and their political party further down the line. But for way too long we have been electing Republicans and Democrats who happen to be Americans instead of Americans who happen to be Republicans and Democrats.

Page 8 of 17 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •