View Mobile Site
zone code Advantage Code _
 

Ask the Expert

Signal Photos

 

Steve Lunetta: The RAN mailbag

Posted: August 7, 2014 2:00 a.m.
Updated: August 7, 2014 2:00 a.m.
 

We here at the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, also known as the Party of No (or is that “Know”?) often get letters from our loyal readers. Several are reproduced here for your reading enjoyment.

Dear VRWC: I have a problem. How do I save water but still keep my yard looking beautiful? Please advise. Signed, brown thumb in the SCV
Brown Thumb: I have discovered that low-water plants like society garlic and lantana are great plants that are extremely drought tolerant. All of our local water agencies have suggestions on low-water landscaping — you might want to go to their websites.
Also, the folks over at Green Thumb on Railroad Avenue helped me out immensely. Definitely work on this before the Water Nazis come knocking on your door to fine you $500 for “overwatering.”

Dear VRWC: What do you think about instant replay in baseball? I introduced it as a way to insure correct calls on the field. B. Selig
Hey Bud: Instant replay, on the surface, sounds like a great idea.
But every game I have seen this year has been slowed by a five- or 10-minute delay in play while the replay officials are looking at video. This delay is annoying.
And the perceived “value” is questionable. Bad calls have always been part of baseball and, in my experience, always go both ways.
Did your team get “robbed” on that call? I guarantee the other team will experience the same in the next inning.
Let ‘em play ball, Bud!

Dear conservatives: what should I do to solve the water crisis? J. Brown
Governor: Look at what just happened. We have a little rain, get flash flooding, and all of the water is gone. Why don’t we build retention ponds to capture this water when it comes and not allow it to just run to the ocean?
On top of that, you are spending $68 billion on a bullet train that we do not need. No one will be riding a train in an arid wasteland.
Let’s build better water infrastructure and maybe a few desalination plants. Isn’t that a better use of this money?

Dear Party of No: Why won’t your minions do what I want? I am the president! You must bend to my will and serve my whims, mortals! B. Obama
Sir: Um, no. Here is the problem you are facing: conservatives for so long have compromised and negotiated with an intractable and unbending left. This has caused a slow but steady move to the left on nearly all issues economic and social.
Many of these folks are now angry and want to push back. Maybe you know them by another name: the tea party?
Here is the deal. You are now going to need to give and negotiate to the right. My concern, however, is that you may not be able to do so now.
You have become accustomed to getting you way in most areas. Can you compromise? Can you work with an unbending right? Time will tell.

Dear VRWC: Why don’t you stand up against these new electronic billboards along the 14 freeway? Why doesn’t the City Council respect us? A grumpy citizen
Grumpy: You collected signatures on a petition and got the council to act. They voted to allow the SCV to vote on this in the fall. They respected you and gave you what you asked for.
Frankly, I like the idea of dumping a large number of ugly billboards in exchange for two or three electronic billboards along the freeway. Not sure who really loses in this deal.
But, please campaign and make your case to the people.

Dear Right-Wingers: We hope you are ready for $5 per gallon gas by the end of the year. Our cap-n-trade initiatives are saving the globe! Looney Tree Huggers
Huggers: I hope you are happy but we do see a ray of sunshine. Democrats are now crossing over to join Republicans in stopping the excesses of the California Global Climate Change craziness.
Hopefully, this can be fixed before new taxes will drive fuel costs through the roof, impacting transportation, grocery and retail prices.

Dear VRWC: I have greatly enjoyed your columns! Keep it up. E. Bobeck
E: Thanks, Mom

So ends another set of excellent letters from our readers. And many thanks to The Mighty Signal for allowing us to express our freedom of speech each and every day.
Steve Lunetta is a resident of Santa Clarita and the grand imperious leader of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy. He can be reached at slunetta63@yahoo.com.

 

Comments

Indy: Posted: August 7, 2014 5:19 p.m.

Really excellent recap of the phantom ‘voter fraud’ issue here: http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/voter-id-laws-charts-maps

Very good recap of the nonexistent issue drummed up by the GOP to retain the House majority even though in the aggregate, democrats got more than 1 million votes than republicans in House races.

In any event, excellent graphs . . . but these statistics stood out:

“Last December, Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus declared that Wisconsin is "absolutely riddled with voter fraud." In fact, the state's voter fraud rate in 2004 was 0.0002 percent—just 7 votes.

In 2008, John McCain said fraudulent registrations collected by ACORN were "one of the greatest frauds in voter history in this country, maybe destroying the fabric of democracy." The Congressional Research Service found no proof that anyone improperly registered by ACORN tried to vote.

Federal convictions for election fraud, 2002-05
 Voting while ineligible: 18
 Voting multiple times: 5
 Registration fraud: 3”

Finally, I thought this was a bit more humorous but shows the stupidity of this issue:

“Between 2000 and 2010, there were:

649 million votes cast in general elections

47,000 UFO sightings

441 Americans killed by lightning

13 credible cases of in-person voter impersonation”

Indy, remember if you don’t vote in November, the people that create this ‘phantom issues’ will still control the House!


therightstuff: Posted: August 7, 2014 7:46 p.m.

ahhh mother jones. Now THERE'S an unbiased source of political discourse. Geez...no 'speculation and innuendo' there.

But yes, we need to vote in November for the GOP to keep the House and take the Senate to limit the damage of Obama's last two years in office.


Indy: Posted: August 7, 2014 8:25 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: ahhh mother jones. Now THERE'S an unbiased source of political discourse. Geez...no 'speculation and innuendo' there.

Indy: What’s really sad here but something I’ve come to expect from older religious conservatives is to ‘character assassinate’ anything or anyone that exposes the failures of conservative ideology positions like voter suppression.

Why would the GOP have such a ‘full force’ approach at voter suppression when the statistics show there is no issue?

13 cases in 10 years! Out of 649 million votes?

Anyway, check the link . . . . review the ‘documented’ statistics.

In any event, the hope of the GOP is that you listen to their blowhards and don’t vote.

If you let their obstruction frustrate you, rather than not vote, vote the clowns out of office.


Indy: Posted: August 7, 2014 8:30 p.m.

And there’s more about GOP voter suppression . . .

The voter-fraud problem that plainly doesn’t exist
08/07/14 12:45 PM—Updated 08/07/14 01:42 PM
By Steve Benen

Loyola University Law School professor Justin Levitt is a national expert on democracy and election administration, and when he presents the results of a “comprehensive investigation” into voter impersonation, he doesn’t use the word “comprehensive” lightly.

Indeed, the professor has looked into every “specific, credible allegation that someone may have pretended to be someone else at the polls, in any way that an ID law could fix.” This includes every election in the United States from 2000 through 2014, including “general, primary, special, and municipal elections.”

In that time, “more than 1 billion ballots were cast” by Americans. And how many instances of voter impersonation – the kind of fraud voter-ID laws are intended to address – did Levitt find?
So far, I’ve found about 31 different incidents (some of which involve multiple ballots) since 2000, anywhere in the country. […]

Some of these 31 incidents have been thoroughly investigated (including some prosecutions). But many have not. Based on how other claims have turned out, I’d bet that some of the 31 will end up debunked: a problem with matching people from one big computer list to another, or a data entry error, or confusion between two different people with the same name, or someone signing in on the wrong line of a pollbook.
Note, we’re not talking about 31 percent; we’re talking about 31 separate incidents, some of which may turn out to be nothing.

Kevin Drum added that if every one of these instances “turns out to be a genuine case of fraud, that’s a fraud rate of 0.00002%.”

Indy: As we can see, the GOP isn’t going to do really anything constructive and spends most of their time trying to defeat the process of democracy that threatens your liberty.

Want more of this insanity? Vote for republicans in November.


Indy: Posted: August 7, 2014 9:02 p.m.

You can see that the GOP lead ‘news’ anchors at Fox were a ‘bit off’ with their ‘innuendo and speculation’ over this incident in Libya . . . as we see now that the ‘official’ report is forthcoming:

Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/yet-another-setback-benghazi-conspiracy-theorists-0

By Steve Benen
The House Intelligence Committee is among the many congressional panels to investigate the deadly attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi in 2012, and its findings are reportedly complete. The committee’s report is not yet available, but Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) talked to the San Francisco Chronicle about the results of the inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies.

Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9.

And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”

It would appear some Republican lawmakers who’ve spent 23 months screaming the exact opposite owe the public an explanation for why they were wrong.

Indy: My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


Lotus8: Posted: August 7, 2014 9:21 p.m.

Indy - take a deep breath and relax. All it takes is a little spark and you are off to the races with left leaning statistics about this, that and the other. It is like a giant shotgun shell filled with nonsense indiscriminately wasting everyone's time.

A note of clarification for the future. Would you like me to put quotes around my posts to save you the trouble when you copy and paste them to your next post where you waste tons of comment space by pasting everyone's prior posts in your own posts? This habit is becoming quite aggravating.


therightstuff: Posted: August 7, 2014 9:34 p.m.

Indy: “Between 2000 and 2010, there were:
649 million votes cast in general elections
47,000 UFO sightings
441 Americans killed by lightning
13 credible cases of in-person voter impersonation”

And 3,214,568 posts by Indy on The Signal which has changed the mind of no one. Now THAT'S sad.


projalice11: Posted: August 7, 2014 11:11 p.m.

What is sad is that the Benghazi radicals wasted two years in investigating this
matter which was dead in the water from the outset ****************

What is sad is that all of that money was wasted on the taxpayers dime ******


tech: Posted: August 7, 2014 11:58 p.m.

It's obvious to any sentient being that the Obama Administration and the Secretary of State lied about a video to avoid voter accountability prior to the 2012 Presidential election, projalice11.

Further, it's not credible that a partisan member of the Party is concerned about wasting taxpayer's "dimes".


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 1:16 a.m.

"""Benghazi radicals"""

On Planet Democrat, searching for the truth is considered radical.


ricketzz: Posted: August 8, 2014 10:02 a.m.

The House Armed Services Committee has publicly scolded Issa for the Benghazi Obsession. Other House committees have cleared Clinton, Obama, Rice of any wrongdoing. There is nothing there. Most unsatisfying to those who lust for warm blood but the truth often disappoints.

Voting restrictions are designed to prevent poor people from voting. Conservatives don't think poor people deserve a voice in our system. Not racist. Worse, really.


OldReliable: Posted: August 8, 2014 10:20 a.m.

Nothing there but Benghazi ineptitude; it was the video's fault. Hey Steve Lunetta, nice op-ed!


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 10:26 a.m.

"""Other House committees have cleared Clinton, Obama, Rice of any wrongdoing."""

Which House committee cleared Clinton, Obama, and Rice for purposely misleading the American people by telling us Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack for weeks after it happened but a spontaneous reaction to a video? The reason why this is important (except to hopeless Obama loyalists) is that if an administration would deliberately and repeatedly lie about the murder of Americans, what else would they lie about?

Think...."If you like your insurance you can keep it. Period!"

To see nearly 70 more statements made by Barack Obama that have been documented as "FALSE" by Politifact, check them out here. This character is either the most misinformed politician in Washington or the most deceitful. Frankly, I think it's a little of both.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/


projalice11: Posted: August 8, 2014 11:31 a.m.

" we need to vote in November for the GOP to keep the House and take the Senate to limit the damage of Obama's last two years in office"

We need to to stop the GOP in the House from their radical thinking and ways
from the damage that they have caused to this country****




therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 12:03 p.m.

"""radical thinking"""

Only on Planet Democrat would reducing our $17-trillion debt be considered radical thinking.


Lotus8: Posted: August 8, 2014 1:29 p.m.

If the GOP would ditch the religious loons and root out the RINOs to make the party about fiscal sanity and American constitutional excellence it would have a much easier time expanding its base. The religious loons will vote for the "R" regardless. Treat them like the democrats treat the minorities in their own party, which is ignoring their issues because they vote for you at a >90% clip in the case of certain groups.

The "D" folks need to ditch the racial nonsense and the total lack of moral expectations with respect to their candidates. Their candidates remind me of those from Europe who openly are having orgies and cheating on their spouses while the public expects nothing better because, meh, they're politicians. An R cheats on his wife and he is forced to resign. A D does it and they just hang on tight, play the race card or blame some kind of poppycock medical condition like sexual addiction, promise their party hacks and union bosses that they'll do anything they want as long as they can keep their jobs, and another unquestioning, loyal army ant is born.

Both groups as they are currently formed make me want to puke.


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:25 p.m.

Voter ID laws fix a fake problem by creating a real one
Updated by Ezra Klein on August 7, 2014, 3:30 p.m. ET
http://www.vox.com/2014/8/7/5979377/voter-id-laws-fix-a-fake-problem-by-creating-a-real-one?utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook&utm_campaign=ezraklein&utm_content=friday

Loyola University law professor Justin Levitt tried to quantify the epidemic of voter ID fraud that's forcing so many states to pass restrictive voter ID laws. He looked for not only cases where someone was convicted, but tracked "any specific, credible allegation that someone may have pretended to be someone else at the polls, in any way that an ID law could fix."

Out of roughly a billion votes cast, he found 31 credible cases of voter ID fraud. And that is, he thinks, an overestimate. At the same time, thousands of people really are being turned away from polling places because they don't have the right ID. So voter ID laws fix a fake problem by creating a very real one.

Which isn't to say voter fraud isn't real. Last night on MSNBC, Levitt explained why the voter ID laws don't do anything to address the main kinds of voter fraud:

Indy: As we see, the voter suppression movement set forth by the GOP is there to curtail voters that don’t like the GOP . . . and we can see why . . .


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:28 p.m.

Lotus8 wrote: Indy - take a deep breath and relax. All it takes is a little spark and you are off to the races with left leaning statistics about this, that and the other. It is like a giant shotgun shell filled with nonsense indiscriminately wasting everyone's time.

Indy: You bet . . . and more to come as we move toward November.

If Fox et al wants to grandstand ‘innuendo and speculation’ as news . . . then ram it down our throats at forums like this, well, should I just open my mouth wider for such nonsense?

Please . . . but feel free to post Fox statistics and links . . . that refute those I've posted.

The statistics are clear . . . the fact that Fox doesn’t report them is unconscionable . . .

Lotus8 wrote: A note of clarification for the future. Would you like me to put quotes around my posts to save you the trouble when you copy and paste them to your next post where you waste tons of comment space by pasting everyone's prior posts in your own posts? This habit is becoming quite aggravating.

Indy: Then just don’t read my posts . . . it’s as simple as changing the channel from Fox . . .


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:30 p.m.

Lotus8...let's talk. How are you defining 'religious loons'? Religious conservatives make up about 30% of the GOP base and contrary to what you might think, they will not vote for the "R" regardless. Instead, they're just not voting at all which is a vote for the Democrats.

When Reagan ran he embraced religious conservatives and won in two historic landslides. The last two elections the GOP ran a 'moderate' thinking this would 'expand its base'. This is how Obama got re-elected because a moderate never beats a liberal for president.

Every time the GOP loses religious conservatives, they lose elections. Democrats know this which is why they try to convince the GOP to distance themselves from them.


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:31 p.m.

Tech wrote: It's obvious to any sentient being that the Obama Administration and the Secretary of State lied about a video to avoid voter accountability prior to the 2012 Presidential election, projalice11.

Indy: Complete falsification and the reason Fox uses such ‘innuendo and speculation’ to get their ‘true believer’ followers to recite it ahead of the investigation for political gain.

And this guy is criticizing Obama? Please . . .

Again, what did the committee report:

“The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.””


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:32 p.m.

Ricketzz wrote: The House Armed Services Committee has publicly scolded Issa for the Benghazi Obsession. Other House committees have cleared Clinton, Obama, Rice of any wrongdoing. There is nothing there. Most unsatisfying to those who lust for warm blood but the truth often disappoints.

Voting restrictions are designed to prevent poor people from voting. Conservatives don't think poor people deserve a voice in our system. Not racist. Worse, really.

Indy: Word.


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:36 p.m.

Indy: """If Fox et al wants to grandstand ‘innuendo and speculation’ as news . . ."""

And yet you cannot give us any evidence which makes your criticism nothing more than 'innuendo and speculation'.

Hypocrisy exposed yet again.

And Indy, I thought we talked about your Fox News obsession. Isn't there some liberal support group you could join? Seriously dude, you need help.


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 5:48 p.m.

"""Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given."""

What did the report say about how Obama, Clinton, Rice, and others purposely misled the American people that Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous reaction to a video when they KNEW FOR TWO WEEKS that was a terrorist attack?



Indy: """My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013"""

An ebook that this poster has never even read himself and yet he's already convinced it outlines the 'actual' events that took place.

This is what an Obama wh0re looks like.


ronos: Posted: August 8, 2014 6:32 p.m.

People actually read this pathetic drivel !?


projalice11: Posted: August 8, 2014 9:36 p.m.

From the wisdom of trs: "And Indy, I thought we talked about your Fox News obsession."

OMG talk about obesssion trs, Benghazi Benghazi, Benghazi, BENGHAZI*********


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 9:46 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """If Fox et al wants to grandstand ‘innuendo and speculation’ as news . . ."""

And yet you cannot give us any evidence which makes your criticism nothing more than 'innuendo and speculation'. Hypocrisy exposed yet again.

Indy: “The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.””

Therightstuff wrote: And Indy, I thought we talked about your Fox News obsession. Isn't there some liberal support group you could join? Seriously dude, you need help.

Indy: I don’t think any of the hard core religious conservatives will accept any finding on Libya doesn’t ‘conform’ to the Fox ‘version’ of events.

Ideologues by their nature ‘simply ignore’ what doesn’t fit their worldview as we see with this poster.

I know how hard it is to swallow the ‘reality’ in play here . . . but ‘it is what it is’.


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 9:49 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: """Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given."""

What did the report say about how Obama, Clinton, Rice, and others purposely misled the American people that Benghazi was the result of a spontaneous reaction to a video when they KNEW FOR TWO WEEKS that was a terrorist attack?

Indy: """Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given."""

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013"""

An ebook that this poster has never even read himself and yet he's already convinced it outlines the 'actual' events that took place. This is what an Obama wh0re looks like.

Indy: As I’ve stated to this conservative ideology recitalist, I’ll be happy to go through that eBook ‘page by page’ . . . so what is the poster here waiting for?

Afraid of the truth?


Indy: Posted: August 8, 2014 9:58 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: """radical thinking"""

Only on Planet Democrat would reducing our $17-trillion debt be considered radical thinking.

Indy: From: http://thenationaldebtcrisis.com/the-national-debt-by-president/

> Ronald Reagan’s First Term – $656 billion increase

> Ronald Reagan’s Second Term – $1.036 trillion increase

> George H.W. Bush’s Term – $1.587 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

> George W. Bush’s First Term – $1.885 trillion increase

> George W. Bush’s Second Term – $3.014 trillion increase

> Barack Obama’s First Term – $5.806 trillion increase

So we see the poster again ‘distort’ per the Fox ‘innuendo and speculation’ recital about the national debt . . . yet as we see here, prior to Obama, Bush W ‘doubled’ the national debt.

And when Bush W took office, he ‘inherited’ a surplus from Clinton and quickly turned that into ‘doubling’ based on ‘tax cuts for the wealthy’.

And when Obama took office, Bush W had the economy in ‘free fall’ having seen the stock market cut in ‘half’ and ran a last year deficit over a Trillion Dollars . . . not to mention seeing the US losing jobs in the last month of Bush W to the tune of about 750,000 Americans!

Had we taken the ‘austerity’ approach by conservatives, something they don’t even follow during the 6 years under Bush w that they had all three branches of government, we’d be in another ‘depression’.

But it matters little to the hard core conservative ideologues that are economically illiterate like this poster.

And while this is all happening, the tax cuts by Bush W have accelerated the ‘wealth concentration’ to which the top 1% now take more than 20% of all income!

So be careful reading the TRS ‘quick quips’ that are based on recitals from Fox et al . . . believing them can only hurt you . . .


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 11:12 p.m.

Indy: As I’ve stated to this conservative ideology recitalist, I’ll be happy to go through that eBook ‘page by page’ . . . so what is the poster here waiting for?

Show me the page about how Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney insisted Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video. They did this for two weeks after they clearly knew it was a terrorist attack. What is David Brock's explanation for this?

What are YOU waiting for?


therightstuff: Posted: August 8, 2014 11:16 p.m.

Indy: """So we see the poster again ‘distort’ per the Fox ‘innuendo and speculation’ recital about the national debt . . . yet as we see here, prior to Obama, Bush W ‘doubled’ the national debt."""

Reagan inherited a much worse situation that Obama did and completely turned our economy around at home and rebuilt our reputation around the world. If he had failed - as Obama has - can you imagine Reagan still blaming Carter after six years in the White House?

That's the difference between a leader and a community organizer.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 12:19 a.m.

> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

"""And when Bush W took office, he ‘inherited’ a surplus from Clinton"""

According to your own stats the national debt increased $1,540,000,000 under Clinton. So how could Bush inherit a surplus? Or are we back on Planet Democrat?


projalice11: Posted: August 9, 2014 12:21 a.m.

OMG Still a fixation on a community organizer ++++++


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 1:01 a.m.

Are you referring to the media and your fellow Democrats? Yeah...hard to believe, huh?


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 1:17 a.m.

Indy: """I don’t think any of the hard core religious conservatives will accept any finding on Libya doesn’t ‘conform’ to the Fox ‘version’ of events."""

For two weeks Obama and his minions insisted Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video. This is not the Fox 'version' of events - that's what actually happened. And yet Obama wh0res still want to blame Fox News for the lies their leader deliberately told to save his political ass leading up to the 2012 election.

And why is this important? Because if a politician will lie about the murder of Americans at the hands of terrorists, what else would he lie about?

(If you like your insurance you can keep it. I guarantee it. Period!)

Politifact has a list of nearly 70 whoppers told by this politician.

http://www.politifact.com/personalities/barack-obama/statements/byruling/false/

And what do Obama wh0res do about these lies? They attack Fox News.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 1:25 a.m.

projalice: """OMG talk about obesssion trs, Benghazi Benghazi, Benghazi, BENGHAZI*********"""

Yeah, I confess to my obsession of finding the truth behind all the lies that were told about this terrorist attack to save Obama's political ass. As someone who is blindly loyal to Barack Obama and the Democratic Party, I know it's hard for you to understand.


projalice11: Posted: August 9, 2014 2:39 a.m.

TRS KEEP UP YOUR OBSESSION WITH BENGHAZI AND THE OBAMA WH-RES AND ALL THE OTHER
OF YOUR INANE POST, IT ONLY MAKES YOU LOOK INANE, WHICH SEEMS TO BE YOUR CHOICE ****


ricketzz: Posted: August 9, 2014 9:55 a.m.

How is setting fire to a place with a handful of diplomats at 10P a "terrorist" attack? Prove it wasn't related to the Cairo riots, blasphemous video.


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 4:21 p.m.

Fox News Silence On Latest Benghazi Info Tells You Everything
AUGUST 8, 2014 BY AARON WYSOCKI
https://www.tytnetwork.com/2014/08/08/fox-news-silence-on-latest-benghazi-info-tells-you-everything/

“Fox News has gone silent on Benghazi amid reports that the House Intelligence Committee concluded that there was no intentional wrongdoing in the Obama administration’s response to the 2012 attacks in Benghazi, Libya.

The San Francisco Chronicle reported on August 1 that the Republican-led House Intelligence Committee voted to declassify findings from its investigation into the 2012 attacks on U.S diplomatic facilities in Benghazi, and “concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack,” according to committee member Rep. Mike Thompson (D-CA).

The intelligence community “did not have specific tactical warning of an attack before it happened,” the process used to create administration talking points was “flawed” but “reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis, and “there was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel,” Ranking Member Rep. Dutch Ruppersberger (D-CA) said in a statement laying out the committee’s findings.“*

Indy: You can watch the telecast video through the link . . .


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 4:25 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: As I’ve stated to this conservative ideology recitalist, I’ll be happy to go through that eBook ‘page by page’ . . . so what is the poster here waiting for?

Show me the page about how Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Susan Rice and Jay Carney insisted Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video. They did this for two weeks after they clearly knew it was a terrorist attack. What is David Brock's explanation for this?

Indy: We can discuss as you read through the eBook . . . feel free to cite anything you feel conflicts with the Fox ‘innuendo and speculation’ that we now see was false and misleading . . . and used as a partisan political tool for conservative fund raising.

At Amazon: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 4:36 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote:
> Bill Clinton’s First Term – $1.122 trillion increase

> Bill Clinton’s Second Term – $418 billion increase

"""And when Bush W took office, he ‘inherited’ a surplus from Clinton"""

According to your own stats the national debt increased $1,540,000,000 under Clinton. So how could Bush inherit a surplus? Or are we back on Planet Democrat?

Indy: It’s quite understandable that many conservatives remain puzzled to the difference between the ‘debt’ (the accumulation of yearly deficits) to a yearly deficit.

We can see from here the surpluses that Clinton ran in his last years in office:
http://usgovinfo.about.com/od/federalbudgetprocess/a/Budget-Deficit-History.htm

• 2001 - $128.2 billion budget surplus

• 2000 - $236.2 billion budget surplus

• 1999 - $125.6 billion budget surplus

• 1998 - $69.3 billion budget surplus

When Bush W came in he immediately got tax cuts for the higher income earners and immediately started running deficits to the point that he ‘doubled’ the total ‘national debt’ in his 8 years in office.

In any event, its painful to keep having to display the actual reality here to ideology driven conservatives that appear simply not to believe anything other than that recited to them by Fox et al.

As we can see here, the poster can’t graps the difference between yearly ‘deficits’ and the aggregated total of the national debt.

Not knowing things like this makes you susceptible to ‘focus group tested’ slogans that rely on public ignorance for their acceptance and subsequent recitals by conservatives at forums like this . . .


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 4:41 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """I don’t think any of the hard core religious conservatives will accept any finding on Libya doesn’t ‘conform’ to the Fox ‘version’ of events."""

For two weeks Obama and his minions insisted Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video. This is not the Fox 'version' of events - that's what actually happened. And yet Obama wh0res still want to blame Fox News for the lies their leader deliberately told to save his political ass leading up to the 2012 election.

Indy: Here the poster is reciting the Fox talking point . . . .

But from the actual committee that investigated the Libya incident free of partisan driven ‘innuendo and speculation’:

“The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

Indy: This is the problem with living in an ideology based world as this poster does where you ignore anything that conflicts with your beliefs based on ideology.

I would suggest checking anything this poster asserts to see if it’s just a recital of ‘innuendo and speculation’ or actually has a relevance to the reality we all face.

As we see here on the Benghazi incident, the poster remains in denial . . . simply not wanting to ‘believe’ as he was instructed to ‘believe’ by Fox.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 8:31 p.m.

Easy to sum up all of Indy's posts with his own words:

Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 5:29 p.m.

"""I’m sure Jesus would be as disappointed and ashamed at a media outlet like Fox deceiving and poisoning our political discourse . . . as I am . . ."""

Confession is the first step toward healing. --edited.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 8:36 p.m.

ricketezz: """How is setting fire to a place with a handful of diplomats at 10P a "terrorist" attack?"""

Obama said in the second debate that he knew it was a terrorist attack within 24 hours. And yet he went on a cash junket the next day to Vegas and for the next two weeks he and his minions kept telling the American people that it was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video. It is now well documented that he was lying the whole time.

Why you guys continue to defend him no matter what is beyond me.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 10:43 p.m.

Indy: """But from the actual committee that investigated the Libya incident free of partisan driven ‘innuendo and speculation’:"""

If you want to see how Obama wh0res define how something is not driven by partisan innuendo and speculation, look at the 'news' sources they offer:

The San Francisco Chronicle

The Media Matters blog

David Brock (even the NY Times dismisses this idiot for his hyper-partisanship)

and ONLY quotes from Democratic members of the House Intelligence Committee who are desperate to keep the truth about Benghazi hidden for political reasons.

And as you're laughing with me...remember how these same wh0res condemn Fox News for being biased. Because hypocrisy is a way of life, they never see it. --edited.


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 10:51 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Easy to sum up all of Indy's posts with his own words:

Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 5:29 p.m.

"""I’m sure Jesus would be as disappointed and ashamed at a media outlet like Fox deceiving and poisoning our political discourse . . . as I am . . ."""

Confession is the first step toward healing. --edited.

Indy: Said that this religious conservative has to demean Christianity to make this partisan nonsense points . . . but hey, says a lot of about his character . . . or lack of same if you will.

I’m embarrassed for him . .


Indy: Posted: August 9, 2014 10:53 p.m.

Therightstuff wrote: Indy: """But from the actual committee that investigated the Libya incident free of partisan driven ‘innuendo and speculation’:"""

If you want to see how Obama wh0res define how something is not drive by partisan innuendo and speculation, look at the 'news' sources they offer:

Indy: http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/yet-another-setback-benghazi-conspiracy-theorists-0

By Steve Benen
The House Intelligence Committee is among the many congressional panels to investigate the deadly attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi in 2012, and its findings are reportedly complete. The committee’s report is not yet available, but Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) talked to the San Francisco Chronicle about the results of the inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies.

Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9.

And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”

It would appear some Republican lawmakers who’ve spent 23 months screaming the exact opposite owe the public an explanation for why they were wrong.

Indy: My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


tech: Posted: August 9, 2014 11:33 p.m.

idée fixe
Syllabification: i·dée fixe
Pronunciation: /ēdā ˈfēks /
NOUN (plural idées fixes pronunc. same)

An idea or desire that dominates the mind; an obsession.

Origin

mid 19th century: French, literally 'fixed idea'.


therightstuff: Posted: August 9, 2014 11:43 p.m.

And so Indy doubles down on his 'partisan-free sources' by offering Rachel Maddow and MSNBC with more quotes from only Democrats. I invite anyone to Google "House Intelligence Committee Benghazi" and see how the story is dominated by the far-left fringe websites and blogs who will defend Obama at any cost - namely their honor.

We know that Indy has never read the 99 cent pamphlet he keeps endorsing from a Democratic operative who once suggested Bill and Hillary Clinton might have murdered Vince Foster, but he obviously never watched the link he now posts about Fox News being silent about the latest Benghazi report.

John Iadarola, the host of TYT University begins this video by saying that if you haven't heard about the House Intelligence Report on Benghazi, HE CAN'T BLAME YOU BECAUSE THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA HAS SPARED A COUPLE OF MINUTES AT MOST REPORTING ON IT. He continues by saying they have 'some' of the findings that people WILL NOT FIND IF THEY GO TO MOST CABLE NEWS CHANNELS.

Hold your nose for the first minute and see for yourself. It's hilarious!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TpQnWv_dpnc

And yet - these far-left ideologues condemn Fox for giving the same attention to this report as the "mainstream media and most cable news channels." I'm not making this up. See it for yourself. It's all you need to know about hard-core Obama wh0res.

Wow Indy---you REALLY need to vet the crap you post so you don't keep humiliating yourself. Your "deceiving and poisoning our political discourse" needs to stop.


ricketzz: Posted: August 10, 2014 10:47 a.m.

If you'll recall Mitt Romney had a press conference early on 12sep12. It looked too slick to be spontaneous, and the meme "Mideast in Flames" was already going around, because of the video. There are excessive politics on both sides.

Within the realm of possibility is the scenario where a political campaign, in cooperation with right wing Egyptian broadcasters, stirs up the hornets nest with a blasphemous video, then declares the incumbent incompetent at a hastily arranged news conference. Romney looks presidential while Obama is fundraising in Las Vegas. Priceless optics there. No one wanted dead Americans.

There has not been a single investigation into who put the alleged Coptic up to making the film. Who had it re-cut with dubbed insults? Who gave it to Egyptian broadcasters, who then put it on long wave, medium wave, short wave, satellite and loudspeakers on the city streets?


tech: Posted: August 10, 2014 12:27 p.m.

Why is the "director" of the film still in jail? Keep selling the conspiracy theories, ricketzz. :-D


therightstuff: Posted: August 10, 2014 2:36 p.m.

ricketzz...the offensive video had been on youtube since July of that year. So how could it be a "spontaneous reaction"? And the terrorist attack happening on September 11 was just coincidence?

The answer is so blatantly obvious. The presidential race had tightened. Obama was telling Americans that he had Al-Qaeda on the run. And then Benghazi happened. Rather than coming clean that they blew it, they concocted the story about the video. What's disgraceful is that they continued telling that story for two weeks after they KNEW it was a terrorist attack. The mainstream media was committed to Obama's re-election and so they buried the story.

Democrats know this is how it played out but cannot bring themselves to admit that their leader lied about the murders to protect his campaign. Instead, they just personally attack anyone who questions their leader. Some shameless Democratic wh0res keep pushing 99 cent pamphlets they haven't personally read or just default to the far-left meme of blaming Fox News or George Bush for everything rather than deal with the moral failures of their cult leader. It's pretty sick.

And as I've continually said, if a politician will lie about Americans murdered in a terrorist attack, how can he be trusted about other things? Sadly, we found out when Obama lied 37 times to get the ACA passed. And still, Obama's blind followers will gladly trade their honor to defend him.


tech: Posted: August 10, 2014 3:26 p.m.

Look in my eyes, what do you see?
The cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
I've been everything you want to be
I'm the cult of personality
Like Mussolini and Kennedy
I'm the cult of personality
The cult of personality
The cult of personality

Neon lights, Nobel Prize
When a mirror speaks, the reflection lies
He won't have to follow me
Only you can set me free
I sell the things you need to be
I'm the smiling face on your T.V.
I'm the cult of personality
I exploit you, still you love me

I tell you one and one makes three
I'm the cult of personality
Like Joseph Stalin and Gandhi
I'm the cult of personality
The cult of personality
The cult of personality

Neon lights, Nobel Prize
When a leader speaks, that leader dies
He won't have to follow me
Only you can set you free

You gave me fortune
You gave me fame
You gave me power in your god's name
I'm every person you need to be
Oh, I'm the cult of personality
I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of
I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of, I'm the cult of personality

Living Colour - Cult Of Personality Lyrics


Indy: Posted: August 10, 2014 6:29 p.m.

Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/yet-another-setback-benghazi-conspiracy-theorists-0

By Steve Benen
The House Intelligence Committee is among the many congressional panels to investigate the deadly attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi in 2012, and its findings are reportedly complete. The committee’s report is not yet available, but Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) talked to the San Francisco Chronicle about the results of the inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies.

Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9.

And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”

It would appear some Republican lawmakers who’ve spent 23 months screaming the exact opposite owe the public an explanation for why they were wrong.

Indy: My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


tech: Posted: August 10, 2014 6:36 p.m.

Do you suffer from OCD, Indy?


emheilbrun: Posted: August 10, 2014 8:30 p.m.

tech, in all seriousness, my guess is Aspergers Syndrome.

"For instance, someone with Asperger syndrome might initiate conversations with others by extensively relating facts related to a particular topic of interest. He or she may resist discussing anything else and have difficulty allowing others to speak. Often, they don’t notice that others are no longer listening or are uncomfortable with the topic. They may lack the ability to “see things” from the other person’s perspective."

"People with AS may not be as withdrawn around others compared to those with other, more debilitating forms of autism; they approach others, even if awkwardly. For example, a person with AS may engage in a one-sided, long-winded speech about a favorite topic, while misunderstanding or not recognizing the listener's feelings or reactions, such as a wish to change the topic of talk or end the interaction.[9]"

"People with Asperger syndrome display behavior, interests, and activities that are restricted and repetitive and are sometimes abnormally intense or focused."

How many times has Indy asked about your education?


therightstuff: Posted: August 10, 2014 8:58 p.m.

I think poor, hapless Indy summed up his malady best in his own words:

Indy: Posted: July 30, 2014 5:29 p.m.

"""I’m sure Jesus would be as disappointed and ashamed at a media outlet like Fox deceiving and poisoning our political discourse . . . as I am . . ."""

Indy finally confirms what everyone else has known all along.


tech: Posted: August 10, 2014 9:55 p.m.

Whatever the diagnosis, it's passing strange, emheilbrun. Indy is now duplicating 4x + of a post in the same thread.

The compulsion to ascribe all opposition as taking marching orders from Fox News is bizarre as well.


therightstuff: Posted: August 11, 2014 10:06 a.m.

What's most revealing about Indy and all the other Obama minions is how they refuse to answer any direct questions about the video narrative on Benghazi.

When asked about the video, Susan Rice said..."uhhh...I don't have time to talk about conspiracies"

When asked about the video Hillary Clinton aid..."what difference does it make!"

I saw a recent discussion with Bill Maher and he said no one has ever proven there was a scandal with Benghazi. When one of the panelist on his partisan panel raised the issue of the video, Maher said..."okay, it's time to change the subject and his trained seals in his audience laughed and applauded."

And Indy just keeps posting - and re-posting - the same talking points he gets from his far-left websites and blogs. Each time I ask him to answer the question directly because his talking points don't address the video narrative and he just keeps re-postig the same talking points.

Next month will be two years since Benghazi and not one person has ever answered the question: Why did Barack Obama and his administration tell the American people it was a spontaneous reaction to a video for TWO WEEKS when they knew the whole time it was a terrorist attack.

Why continue the charade?


ricketzz: Posted: August 11, 2014 10:09 a.m.

Mark B. Youseff got out a year ago. He was a producer, not the director. The reason the outrage happened when it did is this guy:

"Sheik Khaled Abdalla
A fiery Egyptian TV host on the Islamist satellite TV channel al-Nas, Abdalla is reported to have set off the outrage when he broadcast a clip of the movie trailer that showed the man playing Muhammad. After he showed the video on Sept. 8, the Atlantic Wire reports, online views of the video soared. According to the Guardian, Abdalla drums up outrage among his audience by homing in on perceived threats to Islam and intensifying them."

http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/09/13/friends-of-sam-bacile-a-whos-who-of-the-innocence-of-muslims-film-project/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakoula_Basseley_Nakoula


therightstuff: Posted: August 11, 2014 11:47 a.m.

ricketzz, you're the only one who at least has tried to offer an explanation on the video story which I appreciate. I could follow the 'spontaneous reaction' narrative for the other countries but from all accounts, the Benghazi attack was an orchestrated event with sophisticated weaponry.

According to Susan Rice a few days later when Hillary Clinton went into hiding, this was NOT a terrorist attack. When the top U.S. Diplomat to Libya heard that account he was "stunned" and "embarrassed." Interesting side note, Rice never talked to the top U.S. Diplomat to Libya before she went on all those talk shows to give the video narrative.

The biggest thing was that even when all the dust settled and we KNEW the facts, Obama and his staff continued to sell the video story for two weeks after it happened. And my point continues to be that if a president would lie about Americans murdered in a terrorist attack, why would he be honest with you about your health care, the economy, or or foreign affairs?

It's been well documented that Barack Obama lied 37 times to get the ACA passed and yet his defenders remain unphased in their blind loyalty.


Indy: Posted: August 11, 2014 4:06 p.m.

Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/yet-another-setback-benghazi-conspiracy-theorists-0

By Steve Benen
The House Intelligence Committee is among the many congressional panels to investigate the deadly attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi in 2012, and its findings are reportedly complete. The committee’s report is not yet available, but Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) talked to the San Francisco Chronicle about the results of the inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies.

Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9.

And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”

It would appear some Republican lawmakers who’ve spent 23 months screaming the exact opposite owe the public an explanation for why they were wrong.

Indy: My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


therightstuff: Posted: August 11, 2014 4:14 p.m.

What's most revealing about Indy and all the other Obama minions is how they refuse to answer any direct questions about the video narrative on Benghazi.


17trillion: Posted: August 11, 2014 4:52 p.m.

Liberals never answer your direct questions which is why one should never do so. They either don't know, or more likely, know the answer and realize it will make them look like an idiot thus they will obfuscate and yell "FOX NEWS!!!!" form the mountain and in the morning they will feel much better.


ricketzz: Posted: August 12, 2014 9:37 a.m.

The people want a devious president to deal with a devious world.

Terrorists don't attack virtually empty facilities in the middle of the night. That really doesn't do much terrorizing. If it was an organized attack they had a strategic goal, again-not terrorism. The "Innocence of Muslim" riots happened in every Muslim city from Algiers to Jakarta, but not Benghazi?

You will never be able to prove different and to continue to try to do so is a waste of my tax money. Quit parading Sean Smith's poor mother around and move on.


tech: Posted: August 12, 2014 3:44 p.m.

"The people want a devious president to deal with a devious world." - ricketzz

No, they don't. They need a President that honestly communicates American principles, ideals and objectives tied to our strategic interests. Like JFK and Reagan did during the Cold War and Bush Sr. did in assembling a coalition during the 1st Gulf War.

As unaccustomed as I am to agreeing with Hillary Clinton, I concur with her Obama foreign policy assessment in a recent interview. It was:

“Great nations need organizing principles — and ‘Don’t do stupid stuff’ is not an organizing principle.”

"Don't do stupid sh*t."? "Leading from behind."? Amateur hour, to be sure.

If only she had convinced the President to apply that logic during her term as Secretary of State, global and regional actors would have more clarity and less ambiguity regarding USA policy. --edited.


Indy: Posted: August 12, 2014 4:49 p.m.

Yet another setback for Benghazi conspiracy theorists
http://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/yet-another-setback-benghazi-conspiracy-theorists-0

By Steve Benen
The House Intelligence Committee is among the many congressional panels to investigate the deadly attack on the U.S. outpost in Benghazi in 2012, and its findings are reportedly complete. The committee’s report is not yet available, but Rep. Mike Thompson (D-Calif.) talked to the San Francisco Chronicle about the results of the inquiry.

The House Intelligence Committee, led by Republicans, has concluded that there was no deliberate wrongdoing by the Obama administration in the 2012 attack on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans, said Rep. Mike Thompson of St. Helena, the second-ranking Democrat on the committee. […]

Thompson said the report “confirms that no one was deliberately misled, no military assets were withheld and no stand-down order (to U.S. forces) was given.”

The committee agreed Thursday to declassify its report, nearly two years in the making, and the findings will reportedly be available to the public once it’s cleared by intelligence agencies.

Just so we’re clear, this is a Republican-led committee, with GOP members outnumbering Democrats, 12 to 9.

And according to the Chronicle’s report, the committee’s findings are consistent with everything reality has told us all along: “There was no ‘stand-down order’ given to American personnel attempting to offer assistance that evening, no illegal activity or illegal arms transfers occurring by U.S. personnel in Benghazi, and no American was left behind.”

What’s more, the Obama administration’s process for developing “talking points” was “flawed, but the talking points reflected the conflicting intelligence assessments in the days immediately following the crisis.”

It would appear some Republican lawmakers who’ve spent 23 months screaming the exact opposite owe the public an explanation for why they were wrong.

Indy: My recommendation is this eBook that outlines the ‘actual’ events that took place: The Benghazi Hoax by David Brock, Ari Rabin-Havt and Media Matters for America (Oct 16, 2013)


therightstuff: Posted: August 12, 2014 4:59 p.m.

Tech, Ed Klein gives an interesting narrative from his book "Blood Feud" about Hillary and Benghazi. He claims that Hillary received a call after Benghazi from the White House and was asked to "play ball" on the video story. According to Klein, Hillary initially refused because she knew better. But if she went against Obama leading up to his re-election it would hurt her chances in 2016 so she went along with it.As the Secretary of State, she disappeared for 10 weeks after Benghazi happened. They had to send out an underling like Susan Rice to the Sunday Morning Talk shows to give the company line that Benghazi was NOT a terrorist attack but a spontaneous reaction to a video.It's interesting to note here that Susan Rice's account was proven to be untrue - but she told it any way. For being such a team player, she was actually promoted by this administration. When Clinton finally appeared before Congress she remained calm and collected for over five hours...until she was asked about the infamous video. That was the one and only time Clinton lost her composure. Why such a strong emotional reaction? And her only answer was..."what difference does it make!"I think Ed Klein's explanation is very plausible and if it is true, then ricketzz may get his wish for a devious president. --edited.


tech: Posted: August 12, 2014 7:26 p.m.

That may be a plausible explanation for the disconnect, TRS. There'll be no finding out because few in D.C. have an intense interest in investigative journalism and Congress was inept in its investigation. One of the few areas of expertise in the current administration is running out the clock.

I have no doubt that the recent departure by Hillary Clinton from the administration she was a key participant in constitutes political calculus. It's just rare to hear truth from a politician in general and a Clinton in particular.


therightstuff: Posted: August 13, 2014 12:06 a.m.

The reason it's so hard to let go of Benghazi is because it was so blatantly obvious that Obama and his administration was lying about Americans murdered in a terrorist attack to protect his political campaign. It was extraordinary how the mainstream media wasn't even curious about what happened in Benghazi.

It looks as though Obama may have gotten away with one of the biggest lies in presidential history because of such a disgraceful and subservient press but I pray the ghosts of Benghazi will come back to haunt Hillary's presidential campaign and the truth will finally get out.


ricketzz: Posted: August 13, 2014 9:26 a.m.

JFK assassinated foreign leaders (while publicly feuding with Alan Dulles) and Reagan ran a shadow government to get around Congress. Reagan's administration was the most corrupt in modern times; the most indictments ever.

"The Ghosts of Benghazi" is a little over the top. There's that patented Fox News emotional spin on the news I was talking about.

Obama won (with or without alleged "October Surprise"in September). He has kept our kids out of foreign entanglements. He has saved more American lives than you claim he sacrificed in Benghazi; he is showing remarkable restraint by not bowing to the chattering nabobs.

Putin and Obama are nose to nose in East Ukraine. NATO has expanded to Russia's doorstep. Put yourself in their shoes. Some kind of DMZ must be carved from the Ukraine Russia border. Maybe use the UN. The wrong thing to do would be to add firepower to a tinderbox. We are 4,000 miles from Eastern Europe and Putin is right there; shouldn't we give him the benefit of the doubt on his turf? Would we want him arming Mexico? Cuba?

Our interventionist-on-behalf-of-third-parties foreign policy is stupid stuff. We kill for someone else's gain. Our warriors sacrifice for executive bonuses. Obama refuses to play along; Sec. Clinton signals she will be a "team player".


therightstuff: Posted: August 13, 2014 9:52 a.m.

ricketzz...you left out the part about Obama causing the oceans to rise and the earth to heal.


therightstuff: Posted: August 13, 2014 10:00 a.m.

"""Sec. Clinton signals she will be a "team player"."""

Yep, after criticizing Obama for doing "stupid stuff" internationally - while on her watch incidentally - today she is sucking up to Obama to repair her own political aspirations. After all, she wouldn't want to be considered racist for criticizing Barack Obama.

On Planet Democrat, this is considered presidential material. Reason # 8,446 why I would never be a Democrat.


tech: Posted: August 13, 2014 12:44 p.m.

A Clinton trying to have it both ways. Imagine that!


AlwaysRight: Posted: August 13, 2014 5:54 p.m.

ricketzz- you have so little understanding of world history or geopolitik. Putin is repeating all of the mis-steps that led to WW1 (and WW2, for that matter). Recently read some articles published by Atlantic in 1913-14 that are eerily similar to today's conversation.

If Obama were a student of history (and he is not), his actions would not be that of weakness and supplication. The Kaiser and Fuhrer could have been stopped with a stronger initial response from the West. The same is true for Putin.

European history has an odd way of repeating itself. The exception to this pattern over the past 60 years was the United States involvement in Euro affairs. Now, this is decreasing and guess what is happening? Yep. History repeats itself.


ricketzz: Posted: August 14, 2014 10:24 a.m.

Because of the history I called for a UN supervised "buffer zone" between NATO and Russia. NATO is a neo-fascist alliance supporting Neonazis in Ukraine. They were the snipers at Maidan. Putin has phone taps that prove the USA is pulling the strings in Kiyiv. He is being very patient, probably because of the history.


AlwaysRight: Posted: August 14, 2014 12:48 p.m.

UN has never and will never enforce a "peace."

ricketzz- Russia lost their sphere of influence. That does not sit well with them. Rewind to Nazi Germany in the 1930's (the REAL nazis, ricketzz). Danzig Corridor, the division of Germany from East Prussia, the whole ball of wax. Its the same thing all over again. Germany sought to regain that which was lost.

The loss of American Euro influence is fueling a new crisis. Obama does not have the will to stop this and Putin knows it. This is where selecting a leader with proven leadership qualities is critical.

We made a big mistake with the current occupant of the White House.


tech: Posted: August 14, 2014 1:42 p.m.

The Rus are the people that became the Russian Empire. While experiencing multiple threats to its territorial integrity, the world's largest country has been expansionist throughout history. Never explained is why Russia is entitled to "buffer" client territories not afforded other nation states.

Russia is reacting to its ongoing historical weakness with aggression and bluster. Putin is a creature of the failed Soviet regime and heads up a gangster government.

Their glaring vulnerabilities are Russia's economy and demographics.

Russia and Markets: The Power of Weakness
Investors Anticipating Resolution in Ukraine Are Missing Russia's Bigger Potential for Geopolitical Upset

Russia's economy is greased by exports of raw materials. Oil and natural gas accounted for 68% of total exports last year, according to the U.S. Department of Energy. They also fuel half of the country's federal budget.

When the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia's birthrate went with it. One echo of that will become apparent in the near future. Russian males aged 15 to 29 peaked at almost 19 million in 1979, according to World Bank data. By 2012, that cohort had shrunk to fewer than 16 million. By the end of 2020, it is projected to be just 11.5 million.

Russia's population structure shows why the recent uptick in births won't arrest this. There is a bulge in the number of women aged 25 to 34, born in the Soviet Union's dying decade, according to Peter Zeihan, a geopolitical strategist and author of forthcoming book "The Accidental Superpower."

"These are the perestroika babies," Mr. Zeihan says. As they move through their prime years for having children, and the 1990s birth bust reasserts itself in a smaller cohort coming up behind, the recent baby boomlet should fade. Meanwhile, Russian men still suffer a high mortality rate, with an average life expectancy of only about 65 years, according to World Bank data, versus 76 in the U.S.

This matters in two big respects. First, the hollowing out of the conscription-age male cohort diminishes Russia's military strength, exacerbating its security concerns.

Second, it forms part of an overall shrinkage in Russia's population. Having numbered more than 100 million last year, the country's working-age population, male and female, is set to drop below 90 million by the middle of the next decade and keep dropping, according to World Bank projections.

http://online.wsj.com/articles/heard-on-the-street-russia-and-markets-the-power-of-weakness-1407776766


tech: Posted: August 14, 2014 2:01 p.m.

"We made a big mistake with the current occupant of the White House." - AR

Indeed. America projected its hopes and societal aspirations on a blank slate. Now, reality intrudes.

Obama, for all his media hyped intellectual capacity, fails to grasp the basics of geopolitical history and its ongoing impact. He simply doesn't comprehend Grand Strategy because he's a cipher produced by Chicago machine politics to push the domestic center to the left. Really, what were his accomplishments other than campaigning and winning elections prior to his election to the Presidency in 2008?

Absent leadership from the USA and our allies, those seeking solutions from the UN engage in a fool's errand. That body consists of self-important mediocrities engaged in parochial squabbles and the parasitic bureaucracy that feeds off of advanced economies. Outside of a few world health and economic infrastructure programs, the focus of the UN is itself.


Indy: Posted: August 14, 2014 5:13 p.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: If Obama were a student of history (and he is not), his actions would not be that of weakness and supplication. The Kaiser and Fuhrer could have been stopped with a stronger initial response from the West. The same is true for Putin.

Indy: Let’s see, we were in Iraq for what, 10 years?

And Bush W agreed with the Iraqi government to withdraw combat troops . . .

And now we’re seeing the push again to ‘perpetual’ war to look strong?

Isn’t this the same misguided stupidity we see in our politicians that recite ‘get tough on crime’ then they do NOTHING to address the social economic drivers of crime?

We learned in Viet Nam that if the people don’t want to fight for their nation, no amount of US blood and equipment will suffice.

If the Kurds want to take the fight to ISIS, then arm them . . . including air support.

If the Iraqi Army wants to 'run away' from the fight . . . that's their decision not Obamas.


therightstuff: Posted: August 14, 2014 6:54 p.m.

"Isn’t this the same misguided stupidity we see in our politicians that recite ‘get tough on crime’ then they do NOTHING to address the social economic drivers of crime?"

Reminds me of the misguided stupidity of giving away more government entitlements while doing nothing to address the social economic drivers of poverty.

psssttt...this is the part where you accuse me of destroying America with my religious conservative beliefs which are fueled by Fox News.


AlwaysRight: Posted: August 14, 2014 7:59 p.m.

Indy- odd that you would cite an example from the Middle East when we were talking European history. Last I checked a map, Iraq was not in Europe?

But, let's look at Iraq. Contrary to Obama, Ms. Clinton, and various critics from the left, the Surge worked. While present, US Forces created a relative calm in Iraq that people still comment on today- couples could take strolls in the evening, women could go out unmolested, and children did not need to worry about beheading.

US forces leave, Iraqi government fails to share power, rule of law falls, and anarchy ensues. There are similarities to the Euro situation but different dynamics are at work.

These are dynamics that Mr. Obama cannot fathom. Putin is aware of this and using it to his advantage. --edited.


Indy: Posted: August 14, 2014 9:41 p.m.

AlwaysRight wrote: Indy- odd that you would cite an example from the Middle East when we were talking European history. Last I checked a map, Iraq was not in Europe?

Indy: Well, duh . . .

AlwaysRight wrote: But, let's look at Iraq. Contrary to Obama, Ms. Clinton, and various critics from the left, the Surge worked. While present, US Forces created a relative calm in Iraq that people still comment on today- couples could take strolls in the evening, women could go out unmolested, and children did not need to worry about beheading.

Indy: Yes, the ‘surge’ . . . doesn’t make Bush W’s incursion into Iraq any more palatable.

No proof of WMDs and no linkage to Al Qaeda either . . .

And clearly no ‘thought’ by Bush W or his minions about the sectarian hatreds that existed there either.

Just plowed in and created the mess we were faced with for 10 years not to mention the $2 TRILLION in costs that for the most part, did nothing.

AlwaysRight wrote: US forces leave, Iraqi government fails to share power, rule of law falls, and anarchy ensues. There are similarities to the Euro situation but different dynamics are at work.

Indy: Yes, Bush W agreed to leave Iraq at the request of the Iraqi government.

AlwaysRight wrote: These are dynamics that Mr. Obama cannot fathom. Putin is aware of this and using it to his advantage. --edited.

Indy: Yes, I’m aware of the war mongering going on by the GOP as I write this . . . their solution is ‘perpetual’ war . . . that doesn’t address the socioeconomic factors nor the sectarian ones that create wars.

This the reason Romney lost . . . the public is fed up with republican motivation to ‘shoot first, think later’ . . .


therightstuff: Posted: August 14, 2014 10:48 p.m.

Indy: """Yes, the ‘surge’ . . . doesn’t make Bush W’s incursion into Iraq any more palatable."""

Sad how partisan Democrats always blame Bush entirely but conveniently forget the following Senators who voted FOR the incursion into Iraq.

Lincoln (D-AR)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Dodd (D-CT)
Lieberman (D-CT)
Biden (D-DE)
Carper (D-DE)
Nelson (D-FL)
Cleland (D-GA)
Miller (D-GA)
Bayh (D-IN)
Harkin (D-IA)
Breaux (D-LA)
Mary Landrieu (D-LA)
Kerry (D-MA)
Carnahan (D-MO)
Baucus (D-MT)
Nelson (D-NE)
Reid (D-NV)
Torricelli (D-NJ)
Clinton (D-NY)
Schumer (D-NY)
Edwards (D-NC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Hollings (D-SC)
Daschle (D-SD)
Johnson (D-SD)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Kohl (D-WI)


ricketzz: Posted: August 15, 2014 10:28 a.m.

AlwaysRight is confused. NATO (Germany, Italy, UK, USA, Australia, Spain etc.) is the new Axis. Russia is just Russia. The Allies from ww2 appear to have been assimilated. Except for Russia. They are the good guys. We are the Fascists. We are the Neonazis. Open your eyes. Read any objective libertarian news site, like the excellent antiwar.com and see what the real news is.

Remember to follow the money. It will show you the corrupt.


tech: Posted: August 15, 2014 11:13 a.m.

Fortunately, you have zero impact on USA foreign policy, ricketzz.


AlwaysRight: Posted: August 15, 2014 3:28 p.m.

Just Googled "Axis". Nope. Don't see those countries listed. I must be looking on the wrong internet. I keep forgetting to don my aluminum foil hat and antennae. Can I borrow yours, Ricketzz?


AlwaysRight: Posted: August 15, 2014 3:30 p.m.

Indy- you are a master at redirection when unable to concede that the facts do not support your position on a topic.


ricketzz: Posted: August 17, 2014 10:08 a.m.

I know I did not suggest Google as a source of facts. They are the Citywalk version of the NSA.

http://original.antiwar.com/joshua_tartakovsky/2014/08/15/mass-killing-in-east-ukraine-and-the-failure-of-liberal-intellectuals/



You need to be a registered user to post a comment. Please click here to register.

The Signal encourages readers to interact with one another, following the guidelines outlined in our Comment/Moderation Policy. Click here to read it.

To report offensive or inappropriate comments, e-mail abuse@signalscv.com. The content posted from readers of signalscv.com does not necessarily represent the views of The Signal or Morris Multimedia. By submitting this form you agree to the terms and conditions listed above. Thank you in advance for your cooperation.

 
 

Powered By
Morris Technology
Please wait ...