Well, we have learned that Hillary has fallen on her sword and accepted full blame for the Libya disaster. How convenient. She was AWOL for days but, all of a sudden on the eve of the second debate, showed up and sought out all the media types she could find. She even talked to Wendell Goler from Fox. How convenient.
Harry Truman always stuck by the idea that the buck stopped with him. Kardashian, on the other hand, dodges the buck like the plague. He is allegedly the Commander in Chief (truly comical). He is weak. Only a weakling would hide behind the skirt of his underling. The boy is great at that. First, send out Susan Rice to perpetrate the lie. Then hide behind Hillary. This boy is a spineless fool whose inner makeup is chicken excrement.
But, surely no one is surprised.
Not surprised; however, Hillary takes responsibility with the stipulation that the information was gathered through the "fog of war".
Unbelievable!
Harry Rex Vonner Wrote:Well, we have learned that Hillary has fallen on her sword and accepted full blame for the Libya disaster. How convenient. She was AWOL for days but, all of a sudden on the eve of the second debate, showed up and sought out all the media types she could find. She even talked to Wendell Goler from Fox. How convenient.
Harry Truman always stuck by the idea that the buck stopped with him. Kardashian, on the other hand, dodges the buck like the plague. He is allegedly the Commander in Chief (truly comical). He is weak. Only a weakling would hide behind the skirt of his underling. The boy is great at that. First, send out Susan Rice to perpetrate the lie. Then hide behind Hillary. This boy is a spineless fool whose inner makeup is chicken excrement.
But, surely no one is surprised.
did bush2 take take the blaim for the 3000 killed in new york ?
or reagan the 240 marines killed in beirut ?
Hillary basically destroyed her chance of ever being President.
i would like to see how much money the house rep wanted to or did cut out of the security budget for our embassies and if your boy ryan was behind it ?
vector Wrote:i would like to see how much money the house rep wanted to or did cut out of the security budget for our embassies and if your boy ryan was behind it ?
I'll answer that for you. 300 million.
vector Wrote:did bush2 take take the blaim for the 3000 killed in new york ?
or reagan the 240 marines killed in beirut ?
Uh, which of those presidents tried to cover those incidents up and claim they were something that they weren't all because of an impending election?
If Clinton would have pulled the trigger when he had Bin Laden in his crosshairs there wouldn't have been a New York City to begin with, now would they?
How about that heckle?
LWC Wrote:Hillary basically destroyed her chance of ever being President.
It's hardly the first time her and Bill have been guilty of having blood on their hands, and you see how that never did made a difference.
American citizens never cease to amaze of how stupid they really are , as well as how little of a conscience (or lack of) that the Clintons have.
Bob Seger Wrote:It's hardly the first time her and Bill have been guilty of having blood on their hands, and you see how that never did made a difference.
American citizens never cease to amaze of how stupid they really are , as well as how little of a conscience (or lack of) that the Clintons have.
you got that right beautiful loser they are pretty syupid
TheRealVille Wrote:I'll answer that for you. 300 million.
Simpson-Bowles called for defense spending cuts of 973 billion dollars. Trying to blame Paul Ryan for embassy budget cuts because he advocated for some military budget cuts, even 300 million dollars worth, is laughable. We all know we need to cut spending, but for this white house to try to suggest that the Paul Ryan budget proposal is somehow responsible for the scandal in Libya, and therefore Chris Stevens and others lay dead is reprehensible. This white house, has a fiscal policy that would only be understood by a drunken sailor. Only in this case the sailor gets to go right on spending even after his money is all gone, because of trillions of dollars printed by the Fed and national borrowing. Sequestration will do more than cut defense spending, it will destroy our ability to defend outselves.
In any case, the cuts attributable to Paul Ryan were
proposed spending cuts. They haven't been adopted, because his budget was rejected out of hand by Harry Reid. He was just showing that there was a better way to go than the dems budget suggested.
vector Wrote:you got that right beautiful loser they are pretty syupid
Yep!!! Ironic that you came to mind when I posted it, and it's you that proves the point.
Much thanks Heckle.
nicker:
Hey, by the way, how's about answering a few of those questions from the other day, since you're in the mood to dazzle us all with all that wealth of knowledge rattlin around the gourd sitting on top your shoulders?.
Bob Seger Wrote:Yep, ironic that you came to mind when I posted it, and it's you that proves the point.
Much thanks Heckle.nicker:
your IQ alittle bit higher than i thought it was
hh:
TheRealThing Wrote:Simpson-Bowles called for defense spending cuts of 973 billion dollars. Trying to blame Paul Ryan for embassy budget cuts because he advocated for some military budget cuts, even 300 million dollars worth, is laughable. We all know we need to cut spending, but for this white house to try to suggest that the Paul Ryan budget proposal is somehow responsible for the scandal in Libya, and therefore Chris Stevens and others lay dead is reprehensible. This white house, has a fiscal policy that would only be understood by a drunken sailor. Only in this case the sailor gets to go right on spending even after his money is all gone, because of trillions of dollars printed by the Fed and national borrowing. Sequestration will do more than cut defense spending, it will destroy our ability to defend outselves.
In any case, the cuts attributable to Paul Ryan were proposed spending cuts. They haven't been adopted, because his budget was rejected out of hand by Harry Reid. He was just showing that there was a better way to go than the dems budget suggested.
your boy in the house agreed to those terms ?
i believe he said it was a good thing
vector Wrote:your IQ alittle bit higher than i thought it was hh:
hmmm, and yours, well not quite as high as what we all are giving you credit for, and heck we all even set the bar low for you..
hh:
Anyways, how about a few of those question here tonight? Surely a guy as sharp as what you are, isn't going to intentionaly avoid them? :popcorn:
Bob Seger Wrote:hmmm, and yours, well not quite as high as what we all are giving you credit for, and heck we all even set the bar low for you..hh:
Anyways, how about a few of those question here tonight? Surely a guy as sharp as what you are, isn't going to intentionaly avoid them? :popcorn:
I wouldn't mess with Vector's intelligence. I heard Vector once won a game of connect four in only three moves.
nicker:
the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962
http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/03/news/eco.../index.htm
but in 2010 the people put the crazy's in charge of the house and got there panty's in a wad and this is the agreement they come up with
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/01/news/eco.../index.htm
it's like your boy ryan
bitchin about the stimulus bill he voted against but the 20 millon dollars letters include his praise for the energy programâs aims, and clash with his own budget priorities, which call for curtailing many of the same Department of Energy investments that are designed to spur the growth of green technologies and reduce reliance on fossil fuels..
âI was pleased that the primary objectives of their project will allow residents and businesess in the partner cities to reduce their energy costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the local economy by creating new jobs,â Ryan wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on December 18, 2009, on behalf of the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation.
http://www.boston.com/politicalintellige...story.html
vector Wrote:your boy in the house agreed to those terms ?
i believe he said it was a good thing
I believe you don't have the first clue what you're talking about.
vector Wrote:the debt ceiling has been raised 74 times since 1962
http://money.cnn.com/2011/01/03/news/eco.../index.htm
but in 2010 the people put the crazy's in charge of the house and got there panty's in a wad and this is the agreement they come up with
http://money.cnn.com/2011/08/01/news/eco.../index.htm
it's like your boy ryan bitchin about the stimulus bill he voted against but the 20 millon dollars letters include his praise for the energy program’s aims, and clash with his own budget priorities, which call for curtailing many of the same Department of Energy investments that are designed to spur the growth of green technologies and reduce reliance on fossil fuels..
“I was pleased that the primary objectives of their project will allow residents and businesess in the partner cities to reduce their energy costs, reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and stimulate the local economy by creating new jobs,” Ryan wrote to Energy Secretary Steven Chu on December 18, 2009, on behalf of the Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation.
http://www.boston.com/politicalintellige...story.html
All of this stuff just keeps on zippin by the tower for you huh? Ryan's plan was intended to stop the
GROWTH in spending, not the spending. The dems won't even consider that small little concession. No, it's durn the torpedos, full spend ahead, with them.
TheRealThing Wrote:All of this stuff just keeps on zippin by the tower for you huh? Ryan's plan was intended to stop the GROWTH in spending, not the spending. The dems won't even consider that small little concession. No, it's durn the torpedos, full spend ahead, with them.
but did the house agree with the spending cuts or not ?
vector Wrote:but did the house agree with the spending cuts or not ?
I'm not playing this
very familiar game with you. You tell me, did they? And what's your point?
TheRealThing Wrote:I'm not playing this very familiar game with you. You tell me, did they? And what's your point?
Dont expect vector to answer any of your questions TRT, because he cant. He is the resident forum COWARD.
C.O.W.A.R.D.