• 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!

White House in damage control mode as potential scandals pile up [W:378]

I will summarize your post so the forum participant wont have to waste their time reading them. I can do it in 5 words Well Bush Did It Also

last week i was pulled for speeding and I said to the cop" well Bush was speeding 6 years ago" and you know he still gave me a ticket . How dare him

That would be wrong. If you read my posts regarding each issue you'd find out differently. For instance... I'm against the IRS having targetted groups with the litmus being what partisan lean you have. I do have issues with that and I've stated this in previous posts.

It's just that unlike my conservative brethren in this thread, I have the consistency to be displeased with whatever party is in charge when it happens rather than try to throw flak as if it was sooooooo different when it happened under one or the other.


* edit...

Here ya go... from yesterday when I first commented on the topic of the IRS:

poweRob said:
Very very true. I'd rather there not be any tax exempt status at all but in this case, partisan ideology should not be the criterea for which to decide who to and who not to investigate.

linkypoo...
 
Last edited:
Like I said, I had no idea that you only value the lives of Ambassadors well and above anyone else. Including the Americans killed in that list and non American's that died because of attacks targetting Americans. Knowing htis about you is rather enlightening.

Be as hauty and superior as you want - you still didn't address the issues. And since you're on it about innocent lives and non-American lives, I guess you're on your high-horse protesting in front of the White House to stop Obama from bombing people from drones, many innocent and in the wrong place at the wrong time and some American citizens. You're such a principled and values oriented person, right?
 
If I am not mistaken NOT ONE AMERICAN was killed in any of those attacks but that fact escapes Obama supporters

No, there were some Americans killed in those attacks, but those who were were killed while out in the public doing embassy business - they weren't in their bedrooms in the embassy/consulate under seige.
 
Temper, temper.

If you are going to post leftwing site information you ought to check out the information so let me help you

Karachi consulate attacks

June 2002 attack

On the morning of June 14, 2002, a truck with a fertilizer bomb driven by a suicide bomber was detonated outside the United States Consulate in Karachi, Pakistan. Twelve people were killed and 51 injured, all Pakistanis.

Karachi consulate attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Terrorism in Uzbekistan

Embassy bombings

On July 30, 2004, suicide bombers struck the entrances of the US and Israeli embassies in Tashkent. Two Uzbek security guards were killed in both bombings.[14] The IJU again claimed responsibility.[12]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tashken...bassy_bombings

Terrorism in Saudi Arabia

On December 6, militants staged perhaps their most brazen attack, the storming of the American consulate in Jeddah. They breached the compound's outer wall and began shooting, though they did not enter the consulate itself. A Yemeni, a Sudanese, a Filipino, a Pakistani and a Sri Lankan—all employees of the consulate—were killed, and about ten others were wounded. All of the gunmen were killed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrori...di_Arabia#2004

Damascus bombings

September 12: Three gunmen and a Syrian security guard were killed in a foiled attack on the U.S. embassy. Gunmen tossed grenades over the perimeter walls before opening fire with automatic weapons. A car bomb was detonated outside the embassy, although a truck bomb filled with pipe bombs and gas cylinders failed to explode.[5] Thirteen people were wounded, including two security guards and a Chinese diplomat.

Damascus bombings and other attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Embassy of the United States, Athens

A minor terrorist attack occurred in the early morning of January 12, 2007. No casualties were reported.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embassy...ates_in_Athens
 
Be as hauty and superior as you want - you still didn't address the issues. And since you're on it about innocent lives and non-American lives, I guess you're on your high-horse protesting in front of the White House to stop Obama from bombing people from drones, many innocent and in the wrong place at the wrong time and some American citizens. You're such a principled and values oriented person, right?

The issue is.. how far are you willing to do the splits in parsing the difference in dozens upon dozens of people being killed in attacks on American Consulates including several Americans one of which was a US Diplomat and that of four Americans one of which was an Ambassador. The more you push this the more it shows how fake such outrage is.
 
No, there were some Americans killed in those attacks, but those who were were killed while out in the public doing embassy business - they weren't in their bedrooms in the embassy/consulate under seige.

Well with The Kenya Incident.....Don't you think the Democrats should have to explain why the Security Improvements they made failed again. Stating this will never happen again..... why it has come round again? Again Warnings, lack of security, and now the Murder of a US Ambassador. In Which Ansar Al Sharia is controlling the whole region. But we are being told we will get those responsible. As the Investigation in Libya isn't going anywhere.

Isn't that part of Improving security? Yet Team Obama has made no move to do so.....huh?
 
If you are going to post leftwing site information you ought to check out the information so let me help you

Thank you for confirming everything I had said. I'm glad to have enlightened you on the topic. You are welcome.
 
Last edited:
The issue is.. how far are you willing to do the splits in parsing the difference in dozens upon dozens of people being killed in attacks on American Consulates including several Americans one of which was a US Diplomat and that of four Americans one of which was an Ambassador. The more you push this the more it shows how fake such outrage is.

You're good at dodging questions you're too uncomfortable to answer - that's your choice. Okay, let's try it this way - in how many of the cases you cited, did President Bush or his administration blatantly lie to the American people about the circumstances or causes of the attacks?
 
I'm not buying it Pero, with respect. People had four years to see what a disaster Obama is/was as President and you had a competent alternative and perhaps you let the media convince you that he wasn't trustworthy but nobody who actually knew the man could claim not to trust him. The majority of voters made the wrong choice and you're going to have to live with it.

CJ, I didn't trust Romney back in 2008, voting for McCain in the Georgia GOP primary, also for McCain in the general. So my distrust goes back farther than just last year. Last year I was a Johnson man. I couldn't vote for either one, in my opinion the least worst candidate. If you remember back on politico, I said as much. Even if you get a win out of the least worst candidate, he is still a bad winner or president. In my opinion the GOP picked the wrong candidate to challenge a very vulnerable sitting president. In fact their whole field was pretty weak.
 
You're good at dodging questions you're too uncomfortable to answer - that's your choice. Okay, let's try it this way - in how many of the cases you cited, did President Bush or his administration blatantly lie to the American people about the circumstances or causes of the attacks?

No one blatantly lied. That is in your head. All you got is them being wrong about the movie instigating the situation and if that is all the GOP sharks have at this point... not to mention why would anyone give a rats ass what caused it... then you guys got nothing but noise.
 
This is so reminiscent of the Clinton years where the GOP investigated all these "gates" in a row to try and smear the presidency. Whitewatergate... travelgate and just kept moving the goalposts until they tripped across a stained dress.
it could be worse... they could, like you lefties, condone, apologize for, and excuse blatant perjury committed by a sitting president.
 
No one blatantly lied. That is in your head. All you got is them being wrong about the movie instigating the situation and if that is all the GOP sharks have at this point... not to mention why would anyone give a rats ass what caused it... then you guys got nothing but noise.

were you ever taught Omission of the Truth is the same as a Lie
 
Last edited:
No one blatantly lied. That is in your head. All you got is them being wrong about the movie instigating the situation and if that is all the GOP sharks have at this point... not to mention why would anyone give a rats ass what caused it... then you guys got nothing but noise.

Petraeus testified he didn't change up Rice's talkin points. The Media considers it Obama downplaying the truth. What do you think that means?
 
CJ, I didn't trust Romney back in 2008, voting for McCain in the Georgia GOP primary, also for McCain in the general. So my distrust goes back farther than just last year. Last year I was a Johnson man.

Johnson is a good man. I'd not mind him as prez even though on many fiscal issues I'd have problems with. Bottom line, I trust the guy. I've been a Nader guy for a loooonnnnng time.

I couldn't vote for either one, in my opinion the least worst candidate. If you remember back on politico, I said as much. Even if you get a win out of the least worst candidate, he is still a bad winner or president. In my opinion the GOP picked the wrong candidate to challenge a very vulnerable sitting president. In fact their whole field was pretty weak.

It takes a stronger and stronger person each election to be third party in the face of the sheep so willing to ALWAYS line up with the two parties and face the snobbish down-talk about how your vote doesn't count if you don't vote like they do... such crap. Kudos man!
 
CJ, I didn't trust Romney back in 2008, voting for McCain in the Georgia GOP primary, also for McCain in the general. So my distrust goes back farther than just last year. Last year I was a Johnson man. I couldn't vote for either one, in my opinion the least worst candidate. If you remember back on politico, I said as much. Even if you get a win out of the least worst candidate, he is still a bad winner or president. In my opinion the GOP picked the wrong candidate to challenge a very vulnerable sitting president. In fact their whole field was pretty weak.

I can't argue with that assessment other than to say that when selecting between bad and worse, bad is always the preferred choice, particularly when you could be surprised by how good bad could be if given a chance.
 
it could be worse... they could, like you lefties, condone, apologize for, and excuse blatant perjury committed by a sitting president.

Voted for him in 1992.idn't vote for him in 1996. Yeah... he shouldn't have perjured himself. I also don't think a whitewater investigator should've stayed on digging up fabrications to try and smear the presidency, but yeah, he shouldn't have lied. More importantly, he shouldn't have ****ed around on his wife.
 
No one blatantly lied. That is in your head. All you got is them being wrong about the movie instigating the situation and if that is all the GOP sharks have at this point... not to mention why would anyone give a rats ass what caused it... then you guys got nothing but noise.

Obama knew 2 hours after the attack, that the video had nothing to do with it. Yeah, he lied.
 
Petraeus testified he didn't change up Rice's talkin points. The Media considers it Obama downplaying the truth. What do you think that means?

News just in... the General was shot by man on the horse. GOP's main concern... what color was the horse.
 
Last edited:
Obama knew 2 hours after the attack, that the video had nothing to do with it. Yeah, he lied.

News just in... the General was shot by man on the horse. GOP's main concern... what color was the horse. Didn't know you knew what Obama knew and when he knew it... ya know?
 
News just in... the General was shot by man on the horse. GOP's main concern... what color was the horse. Who give a ****?

Four Americans are killed, because of the president's incompetance and you ask, "who gives a ****?".
 
No one blatantly lied. That is in your head. All you got is them being wrong about the movie instigating the situation and if that is all the GOP sharks have at this point... not to mention why would anyone give a rats ass what caused it... then you guys got nothing but noise.

The Truth doesn't require 12 revisions
 
I still
think the Bush Administration did far more damage to civil liberties than any WH in my lifetime, but at least they had a reason to with 9/11 and it all had purposes related to that and terrorism. The Obama Administration just feels entitled to do it because Bush did it with no real reason to do so otherwise. I had hoped Obama was serious when he said that all the stuff would have stopped when he took over, but no, Gitmo is still fully-occupied, more drones than ever are zipping around, Afghanistan is still petering right along, the government is still spying on its citizens (though it appears to be for political reasons). IMHO, a true progressive or liberal would have jumped ship from this WH well before now which leads me to believe autocracy for the sake of power is the only principle left in the democratic party. They are not abusing power to protect us--they are doing it for purely political reasons at this point and that is truly pathetic.

I am not surprised by the abuses, and that it is for political purposes. Everything almost always leads back to politicians protecting the power structure.

The sad thing is, what was done to the AP wasn't a crime, and it should be.

When is everybody going to finally realize that the government should get a warrant before wiring taping our phones?
 
The
Bush administration sought and got laws passed that allowed what it did. Obama is doing things that are just plain illegal.

Wire taps? For Christ sake! C'mon, people. This beyond anything.

This is why the rest of the Media had a momentary surge of sanity when obama tried to shut down FOX News. Obama is a petty tyrant who thinks that Chicago politics are justified because he is so good.

Bush wire tapped too. The admin listened into many civilian phone calls, and there reports they got to hear some good phone sex too


No government should be trusted with that much power.
 
House
of cards are starting to come down. I'm not sure if impeachment is merited at this point (depends on how high up this decision making goes) but certainly there might be some irreparable damage to Obama and his crew. He's chosen abysmal administrators as cabinet secretaries so far. At the end of the day, he's the boss and he's held accountable.

Frankly, the've already screwed up. All three issues the WH has pointed the finger at someone else. Benghazi=State Dep or CIA's fault. IRS=IRS's fault. AP phone records=DOJ's fault. A good leader owns it, regardless if they're directly involved and regardless of the consequences.

Havent seen many presidentual admins, but I wouldn't call this response unprecedented. They all shift the blame. GWB did when no WMDs were found. How many people did he end up during?


I think it's typical DC.
 
Yes the founding fathers warned you about corrupt and tyrannical governments.

People who set up a government that didn't allow blacks, women and the poor to vote.

Nor did the rest of the world. The founding fathers had the foresight to put a Constitution together that would one day overcome the inequities they saw. They were the first to do so.

Of course, that flies in the face of your hated for the superior country down south.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom