Sign In | Create an Account | Welcome, . My Account | Logout | Subscribe | Submit News | Facebook | Twitter | Home RSS
 
 
 
Latest Post:
Started By:
Rank:
Category
4 days ago.
by Munster
Ithink
#1

Who Lied About the Attack on 9/11/12?

It is incredible that democrats keep blathering about Romney lying, when we have the shock and disgust of seeing the president and his administration lying to us about the security of Americans. Unbelievable .

 
 

Member Comments

burningdownthehouse

How hard is it to copy and past for ya tired/ithink.aaron? let's see it.

Posted 37 days ago.

You can lead a human to knowledge but you can't make them think!!!

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

I don't use XLS richard.

give us a quote to your 50% increase in revenue

Posted 37 days ago.

What does OMB stand for Betsy?

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

Table 1.3—Summary of Receipts, Outlays, and Surpluses or Deficits (-) in Current Dollars, Constant (FY 2005) Dollars, and as Percentages of GDP: 1940–2018

really?

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

I don't use XLS.

give us a quote to your 50% increase in revenue.

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

*****it Richard.

Posted 37 days ago.

I'm sorry Betsy, I assumed you could use Google. My bad. Fiscal Year 2001 1,991.1 2013 2,712.0

Source: Office of Management and Budget, Historical Tables, Table 1.3; ***********whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/Historicals/ (last accessed May 7, 2013).

Posted 37 days ago.

Tiredofit

Hush Nancy

Posted 37 days ago.

"When Patraeus said the change was for “intelligence, not political reasons,” that impressed me."

I’m not so sure. Between the timing of Patraeus’ testimony and the fact that the Obama Administration sent Susan Rice out to lie on the Sunday Morning talk shows tells me that there’s more to this than meets the eye. Initially, I thought it was because Obama didn’t want to acknowledge the fact that Al Qaeda was still operational despite his asserting otherwise for political reasons dealing with the election but now I’m not so sure.

After hearing a Senator yesterday on the talk show circuit claim the change in talking points was a result of inter-agency infighting, it added to my belief that someone is trying to cover something big up. I’m just not sure exactly what it was. But the fact that this was a CIA base in a recent overthrown country as part of the Arab Spring on 9/11 leads me to believe that this indeed could be 1985 all over again.

Time will tell.

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

As I said before....Bengazi is a FLOP. can the conservatives waste anymore money investigating nothing and re voting to repeal Obamacare?

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

one of their split personalities can't list the freedoms they whine about being stolen, one uses the circle jerk to show their "facts" and the other can't list on citation on their claim of revenues rising 50% since 2001.

the men,? one boy hiding behind 3 names is more like it.

Posted 37 days ago.

Tiredofit

If we want the opinion of a nancyboy, well let ya know.

Posted 37 days ago.

Tiredofit

Shhhh Scotty the MEN are talking.

Posted 37 days ago.

burningdownthehouse

still no citation from the trifecta of trolls.

figures.

Posted 37 days ago.

moderation

Harry, everyone needs a little encouragement to bring their dialogue into focus. And the word hate just isn't becoming of you.

Posted 37 days ago.

Tiredofit

I recall MYTH how the left supported the second Bush term eh? Sometimes you are so blind to your own hypocrisy

Posted 37 days ago.

harryanderson

Aaron, the “talking points” thing angered me at first, but that initial anger abated after David Patraeus testified.

“Gen Petraeus told the lawmakers that references to terror groups were removed from the final version of the administration's ‘talking points’ on Benghazi, although he was not sure which federal agency deleted it.

“Democrats said the former CIA director made clear the change was made for intelligence, not political reasons.”

ww w.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20362941

I realize that these Democrats’ political agenda moved them to claim that Patreaus (whose testimony wasn’t public) said the editing wasn’t politically motivated. I believed these Democrats because neither Republicans with the opposite agenda nor Gen. Patraeus disputed the Democrats’ claim.

When Patraeus said the change was for “intelligence, not political reasons,” that impressed me.

Posted 37 days ago.

mythravere

The Benghazi issue is just the continuation of the make Obama a one term president plan.

Aaron likes to point out my extreme dislike for the right. But it goes both ways.

The right with absolute conviction hates Obama.

The way they conduct their political business proves that.

Posted 37 days ago.

mythravere

Oh and for the record I've been posting on these forums a lot longer than you Aaron.

Nobody twisted your arm to make you respond to me did they.

So why did you waddle on in here and start posting.

Apparently I've pushed some buttons?

So how about this. Just ignore my posts!

LOL! Its real easy.

Posted 37 days ago.
 
 
 
 

Post a Comment

You must first login before you can comment.

*Your email address:
*Password:
Remember my email address.
or