Gator Country

**g8orbill** · 02-09-2013, 01:33 PM

If you libs want to criticize W for continuing to read the story to the kids rather than leave abruptly when we realized we were under attack-go ahead-he delayed his departure for less than 15 minutes-prezbo was awol on ?Benghazi for the entire 7+ hours things went on-we were without anyone who had the where with all to make a decision-it goes back to prezbo's leadership or lack there of-there is nothing W could have done to prevent 9-11; there is plenty prezbo and his team could have done-and they did zilch and prezbo was not even involved-he was told of the initial attack and still went to the sleeping quarters of the WH because he had a big campaign fundraiser scheduled for the next day- total lack of leadership-and yet you people gave him a do over-amazing

http://www.ijreview.com/2013/02/3505...%20IJ%20Review

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 03:45 PM

You know, you all are just so "righteously outraged" over Benghazi, but forgive me if I'm wrong, but two points:
1. Biggest intelligence failure ever happened on 9/11/01, not 9/11/12, and who was president then?
2. How many of our embassies were attacked during the next 8 yrs? Or, in previous years, for that matter, with no preference for the party in power. I think Hillary Clinton explained ALL of what I said. Try to view her whole testimony not just Fox sound bites.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 03:46 PM

Keep in mind that the republican held house of reps denied additional funding requested by the state dept for better security.

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 03:46 PM

Hillary's testimony; "who the hell cares?"

Yes. She said everything we need to know about how the Obama administration viewed the killings of these Americans.

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vertigo0923

Keep in mind that the republican held house of reps denied additional funding requested by the state dept for better security.

This claim had been shot down a long time ago. Please, try and keep up.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 03:50 PM

Figures Dave "who the hell cares". If you want real answers then YOU should care. So, I can only surmise you don't care about the truth and just want to politicize a tragedy, which I already knew republicans were doing. Facts? You don't ""need no stinkin facts!!!"

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vertigo0923

Figures Dave "who the hell cares". If you want real answers then YOU should care. So, I can only surmise you don't care about the truth and just want to politicize a tragedy, which I already knew republicans were doing. Facts? You don't ""need no stinkin facts!!!"

Ummm... That was Hilary's (and Obama's) response... Read it again. I'm sure you'll figure it out.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 03:57 PM

I've watched it, where'd you get you info? Right wing blogosphere?

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 03:59 PM

"What difference does it make?" translated for the lemming masses "who the hell cares?"

chemgator · 02-09-2013, 04:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vertigo0923

You know, you all are just so "righteously outraged" over Benghazi, but forgive me if I'm wrong, but two points:
1. Biggest intelligence failure ever happened on 9/11/01, not 9/11/12, and who was president then?

Irrelevant. The president is not personally in charge of intelligence at any given moment. The president is responsible for reacting to intelligence and making decisions. The CIA, NSA and FBI are responsible for gathering intelligence. And the FBI was following the terrorists in the days leading up to 9-11, but FBI middle management was more concerned for the Saudis' civil rights than the safety of Americans. This lack of leadership and morale in the FBI can be traced to Louis Freeh, the head of the FBI for several years. Who put Freeh in charge of the FBI, even though he was unqualified? Bill Clinton did.

Quote:

2. How many of our embassies were attacked during the next 8 yrs? Or, in previous years, for that matter, with no preference for the party in power. I think Hillary Clinton explained ALL of what I said. Try to view her whole testimony not just Fox sound bites.

Hillary was busy fighting for more money for staffing the embassies, not for security. She was building her empire, ignoring the requests for more security.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 04:09 PM

Especially the part where she said, in testimony, that the state dept asked for more funding for safety, passed by the senate but not the house,you are the one who "needs to keep up"

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 04:10 PM

Ahh, yes... The Gorelick Wall..

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 04:13 PM

"Staffing" equals guards as well as whatever/whoever you think she asked to fund, again, watch her frickin entire testimony. It's actually funny when rand"the idiot" Paul starts his insane questioning, Hillary had no idea what that nutjob was talking about.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 04:20 PM

Ok I'm done in this thread. This is "dead horse beating" at its finest. I know what she said, I know who turned down the request for funding, I know you guys are gonna put all blame on Obama or Hillary, I'm sure it'll be the big rightwing attack on her if she runs in 2016, how predictable. Ignore the times your guys abandoned the constitution, ignore the intelligence failure under bush (Iraq, anyone? No WMD there!!!!), and you'll never accept anything not told to you by "the guys you trust" and seeing that thread calling all news outlets, save Fox, are "liberal biased", there's no point in discussing this dead horse issue. Now, on to the next dead horse issue. Obama's birth certificate?

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 04:30 PM

Is that you, Charlie (Sheen)?

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 05:31 PM

is that the best you can do, dave? really?

but i'll quote charlie, right now, wrt the election. "WINNING"

DaveFla · 02-09-2013, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vertigo0923

is that the best you can do, dave? really?

but i'll quote charlie, right now, wrt the election. "WINNING"

Given the fact that you proclaimed, quite clearly, that you were done trying to defend Obama in this tragedy, then yes. That's the best I can do.

Yes, Obama won, but America lost... Quite badly.

jimgata · 02-09-2013, 06:47 PM

What is the mindset of someone who rationalizes an action of the current administration as beikng ok because they feel that someone in the past was worse?
What someone else did in the past does not have a damn thing to do with the incompetence of this administration.
Of course the left has been indoctrinated to blame Bush for everything, which is a wek argument.

**vertigo0923** · 02-09-2013, 07:22 PM

It's called "having set a precedent" (former administrations ) we may not like it, but there was a precedent set, and that IS used as defense of an action.

The_Graygator · 02-09-2013, 07:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaveFla

Given the fact that you proclaimed, quite clearly, that you were done trying to defend Obama in this tragedy, then yes. That's the best I can do.

Yes, Obama won, but America lost... Quite badly.

What's even more sad, is that these Obama voters who voted for this socialist again knew for almost two weeks that Obama lied through his teeth about Benghazi, but it didn't matter to them. Much like all of the other lies which have come out of Obama's mouth didn't matter to them either.

It was all about voting their party, not their country.