Yes dunce; opposing dear leaders agenda for the good of mankind can only be perceived as obstructionism. Seig Heil!!!
GOP success?
- Thread starter Taichiliberal
- Start date
Yes dunce; opposing dear leaders agenda for the good of mankind can only be perceived as obstructionism. Seig Heil!!!
Got strawmen? You dunces never ask; you just ASSume all the time. If you asked me I would say not even close. But they're right many more times than leftist dunces on the Democrat side of the aside.
maineman
Banned
You can see someone open their mouths in an Internet forum? One thing certain, the stupidity that erupts from your keyboard is beyond mere stupid and cartoonish.
That's an amazing strawman coming from an ignorant slut like you Snarla; please show me one right wing man who likes Putin?
Why don't you crawl back into that cave and spare us your ignorant hate filled moronic tirades?
You're such a pathetic boot kicking mangina dunce. LMAO
only once, really.
the first time we lost to the supremes.
So says the pathetic dunce stuck on that special brand of stupid. But in reality, they prevented the dumbest man in America from stealing an election, while acting like a whiney child, based on divining votes from hanging chads.
Leftists are not just dishonest liars, but painfully ignorant and stupid.
You still think you're in third grade don't you shit-for-brains. You're not merely stupid, but pathetic as well.
\
Yet , UNDER OATH..... Deputy Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security Charlene Lamb testified in October that the size of the attack -- and not the money -- was the issue.
Asked if there was any budget consideration that led her not to increase the security force, she said: "No."
She added: "This was an unprecedented attack in size." Asked again about budget issues, Lamb said: "Sir, if it's a volatile situation, we will move assets to cover that."
--------------------------------------
Asked about Lamb's testimony, Clinton noted that the review board that examined the Libya attack found budget issues have played a role.
The problem is incompetence, not money.
So budget issues played a role ? Really ?
So, what we have is TC still spinning and posting lies that were debunked long ago.
Charlene Lamb testified under oath that funding was not a problem, on top of that,
Tripoli was the only post mentioned in the department's fiscal 2013 request, NOT Benghazi -- funding for that location was $10.1 million in 2012
There were more than 230 security incidents in Libya between June 2011 and July 2012.
48 took place in Benghazi, two at the U.S. diplomatic compound
In a May 3, 2012, email, the State Department denied a request by a group of Special Forces assigned to protect the U.S. embassy in Libya to continue their use of a DC- 3 airplane for security operations throughout the country.
The subject line of the email, on which slain Ambassador Chris Stevens was copied, read: “Termination of Tripoli DC-3 Support.”
Was funding a problem?
Four days later, on May 7, the State Department authorized the U.S. embassy in Vienna to purchase a $108,000 electric vehicle charging station for the embassy motor pool’s new Chevrolet Volts.
$47,500 was spent in March on a Chevy Volt for the American Embassy in Oslo.
-----------------------------------------
Government records show the U.S. Embassy in Cairo, Egypt, spent more than $40,000 on copies of Obama's "Dreams from my Father."
The embassy in Greece paid more than $5,000 for "Dreams from my Father"
In South Korea, the U.S. Embassy spent $6,061 for "Dreams from my Father"
In Indonesia, the U.S. Embassy spent almost $4,000 on hardcover copies of Obama's book "The Audacity of Hope"
Just two days after that purchase, the embassy spent $5,000 on English-version copies of both books.
the State Department $5 million for fancy crystal stem and barware for its embassies around the world.
$1 million for a single granite sculpture set to adorn the new American Embassy in London.
State Department Spent 4.5 Million for Embassy Art
If money was an issue (which it wasn't) maybe its how you spend the money that is the problem.
Last edited:
Translation: Facts bore you and you don't need facts to make the incredibly stupid claims you fabricate.
Carry on.
Your patience debating Liberal dunces is admirable; but facts will not stop them from posting their tired old bullshit. I prefer to just point at them and laugh.
SmarterthanYou
rebel
that, and many liberals also called bush a dictator wannabe, lest you forget that. remember all the bushitler signs?
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
I'm not one to judge, but it's unseemly. They all want some big strong authoritarian daddy to spank them. And there's nothing wrong with that in the proper time and place...but not in the streets where you'll scare the horses.
Especially you poor teabaggers
In your own words (please remember that you were the one that started that kind of nonsense here, not me)... Please stop acting stupid.
Foreign Policy is entirely up to Obama, he does not need the Congress to act. That his policy is seen as weak is because his actions are weak, it has nothing to do with Congress. Bush was seen as a "cowboy" because his actions, not because of Congress.
Obama spends too much time trying to find out what people want rather than acting in the best interest of the USA, foreign policy shouldn't be run on opinion polls.
Polls show don't go into Syria... Obama, no matter how much he thinks our interest would be served by doing it, won't even knock on their door. That's weak foreign policy, and it is him not Congress that brought it on. He can pretend he has some clout, but nobody cares if there are "red lines" drawn, he can walk around with a crayon box drawing "red lines" everywhere for all they care because they know he won't do anything but blather.
only once, really.
the first time we lost to the supremes.
Yeah, its funny how the SC wouldn't condone Gore's attempt to cheat his way in, in that election....I expected them to fold just like the Fla. SC....
If you guys can pack the court with more commie pinheads, you won't have that problem next time you try to pull a fast one....
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
No, because the readers have trouble discerning what you say here from what you stated previously, within the context of what I put forth in the opening post.
Teflon Don
I'm back baby
will anything EVER be Obama's fault in the lefts mind?
Taichiliberal
Shaken, not stirred!
No stupid, she knew she didn't have the votes, given the duplicitous nature of "blue dogs" and "dixiecrats".
And PLEASE note that wikipedia is NOT a reliable source, as intellectually impotent jokers like yourself can access and alter the information WITHOUT adequate documentation or verification.
And no, no one is going to follow you on your detour to try and prove wikipedia is on par with say, the Congressional Record. Bottom line: you're pissed because the GOP is ON RECORD in wanting nothing more to discredit Obama...and that comes in the form of obstruction (as Newt verified). As I said, if Putin sees Obama as weak it's because he knows the GOP will keep him from doing anything constructive for as long as possible ( a matter of fact and history).