Printable View
Please your mother is prolly getting up there in age and is getting a little forgetful, whats obama excuse? ITS NOT SILLY, he is trying to take away your gun rights (a piece at a time) and lying about how much of a "sportsman" he is. God to you liberals is there any lie you can't tolerate?Quote:
Originally Posted by Novaheart
How many people died because Clinton lied about a blow job?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey
How many people died because GWB and his administration lied about Saddam Hussein having weapons of mass destruction?
How many people died because Reagan sold weapons to Iran? How many people died because the DEA at the time was instructed by Reagan administration officials to look the other way when the Contras smuggled cocaine into this country, while at the same time, Reagan was fighting the so called war on drugs and incarcerating american citizens for far lesser drug crimes.
Politicians lie-they all do, on both sides. Your guys are no more righteous than my guys.
I dont know how many times you liberals have to be told about this, it wasn't for a blow job that he was impeached, you know that whole "lying under oath thing" (you do know its wrong to do that no matter what the lie is about?) . He could have came right out and told the truth and gotten away with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Who said GWB lied? he had evidence that there were WMD there. I am sorry it didn't pan out the way he wanted it too. Heck I could provide a number of quotes from liberals that said he had them.
Fast and furious was Obama's attempt to cause so much gun havoc that which in turn he would use to enact his fucked up gun control ideas.
At least with Iran/contra Reagan was trying to get funds/weapons to anti communistic forces, not trying to cover up a blow job or trying to take gun rights away from people. (really important subjects to be sure)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey
So the ends justify the means? He was lying to cover up his own hypocrisy, in that the Contras that he called "Freedom Fighters" were really just drug dealing thugs who committed atrocities in the name of anti-communism. At the same time, Reagan declared a war on drugs and incarcerated americans for the very same crimes being committed by people he was arming and funding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
A lie...period.Quote:
“Have you ever fired a gun?
Yes, in fact, up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time.
Don't you guys know time standards for liberals? 5 minutes is actually 5 years, and one time is actually 100 times. It falls into the same category as dog time..
Which he continues to defend. Since then, we've seen his tactics multiplied. The selective editing of input has become a staple of the Praetorian press. On this very subject, The New Republic presented a Photoshopped photo of Obama with a shotgun as a factual rebuttal to the accusation of lying, i.e., presenting a second lie to cover up the first, and then they followed that up by blaming Twitter. This is Stalinist manipulation, and I'd expect it from the KGB, but not from the press of a free country, or at least one that wanted it to remain a free country.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Hardly. The personnel on the ground in Benghazi were in contact with the US throughout the firefight. They, and their superiors, knew that mortars and other heavy weapons don't just spontaneously appear in protests. We also now know that the compound where the fight took place wasn't a consulate, but a CIA compound, which raises several questions about their mission there. The simultaneous attacks were the result of al Qaeda coordinating multiple engagements on the anniversary of 9/11, in order to make the point that they were still combat effective despite Bin Laden's death. Many of the jihadis who attacked the Benghazi compound were later engaged in the Algerian Oil Refinery attack, which also resulted in American deaths, and some are in Mali, assisting in the consolidation of a new Islamist state which will provide staging areas for attacks throughout the region. The motive for the attack is therefore highly significant, since it is the difference between a spontaneous uproar over trivia and a series of planned and deliberate attacks on the United States.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
You have learned your Clintonian parsing well. Yes, if you slice the salami finely enough, you can almost evade the obvious falsehood, but it takes a very thin blade. In context, he did use the term "we", which would include him, and he said that "we" do it "all the time". Now, in my mind, "we" includes the speaker, as in, someone else and I, as opposed to a group which does not include the speaker, which would normally be referred to as "they". This is where Daffy Duck was say that we are having pronoun trouble. Obama used "we" to imply that when his friends shot skeet at Camp David, he did as well. The second part of Obama's statement was that he and his friends shot skeet "all of the time". Now, while one can take this to mean anything from fairly often to constantly, it does not apply to a one-time action, unless it is continuous, so if Obama has only shot skeet once, but that began the weekend of his inaugural and continued through today without a break, one could say that this singular occurance was "all of the time", and it would not be a stretch, but clearly, Obama has not been shooting skeet nonstop since he took office (unlike, say, golf). So, the question is, did he actually shoot with any regularity? For that, we go back to the OP, which includes the following statement:Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
“The only time he shot skeet was for President’s Cup,” said the source, referring to a shooting competition tradition involving the presidential Marine guards. “I was there. He stayed for about five minutes, and couldn’t leave fast enough.”So, a one-time, five minute exposure to shooting would not constitute something done "all of the time", unless, of course, you are playing Clintonian games with the language.
BTW, the definition of "is": verb 1. 3rd person singular present indicative of be.
1. to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question. 2. to take place; happen; occur: The wedding was last week.
3. to occupy a place or position: The book is on the table.
4. to continue or remain as before: Let things be.
5. to belong; attend; befall: May good fortune be with you.
You Clintonistas seemed to have a problem with that.
Not to mention suborning perjury, obstructing justice and using taxpayer-funded jobs to buy off mistresses. Those are not just lies, but felonies, or, as the Constitution calls the, "high crimes."Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Except that the leader of the other nation had used those weapons in previous wars, the previous administration made the same claims to his having them (and bombed him for it) and, oh yeah, he did have uranium:Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
The last major remnant of Saddam Hussein's nuclear program — a huge stockpile of concentrated natural uranium — reached a Canadian port Saturday to complete a secret U.S. operation that included a two-week airlift from Baghdad and a ship voyage crossing two oceans.
The removal of 550 metric tons of "yellowcake" — the seed material for higher-grade nuclear enrichment — was a significant step toward closing the books on Saddam's nuclear legacy. It also brought relief to U.S. and Iraqi authorities who had worried the cache would reach insurgents or smugglers crossing to Iran to aid its nuclear ambitions.
What's now left is the final and complicated push to clean up the remaining radioactive debris at the former Tuwaitha nuclear complex about 12 miles south of Baghdad — using teams that include Iraqi experts recently trained in the Chernobyl fallout zone in Ukraine.
http://www.nbcnews.com/id/25546334/n...-uranium-iraq/
The second part of that statement is true, Nixon did lie about Watergate after the fact, but he was never proven to have authorized the break-ins or wiretaps.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Wow. Now who is playing with the truth? First, the Reagan administration sold a limited number of anti-armor weapons to Iran, in order to attempt to secure the release of American hostages in Lebanon (you libs always forget that part), while providing Saddam with satellite intel that allowed him to maneuver his armor around the Iranian forces (which negated the value of the weapons, and kept the two most anti-American regimes in the region locked in combat with each other for a decade). Second, you repeat every propaganda claim about the Contras, but let's remember that the Sandinistas were in the process of installing a totalitarian communist state in Central America. The Contras ended up winning power in the first fair election that the Sandinistas ran, despite their efforts at ACORN-style repression. Do you really think that the people of Nicaragua would have voted for what you described?Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
How many died because his SECDEF wouldn't provide armor to the commanders on the ground in Mogadishu? How many died because he wouldn't take out Bin Laden when he had the opportunity? How many people died when his AG barbecued the Branch Davidian compound and then lied about literally everything regarding the siege and subsequent assault.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
None. He didn't lie.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Well, lots of Iranians and Iraqis died, but that was because we kept them fighting, which was actually a good thing. The cocaine fantasy is one of the left's big lies, but again, we are rehashing this.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
Politicians do lie, but there are legitimate and illegitimate reasons to lie. A legitimate reason would be to weaken enemies of the United States and attempt to secure the release of Americans held hostage. An illegitimate reason would be to avoid the consequences of personal conduct, fix a court case (such as the Paula Jones lawsuit), obscure the facts surrounding a foreign policy debacle which will continue to have profound implications for our security in order to win an election or simply to create the impression that someone is something that he is not, such as a shooter of skeet, in order to feign credibility with opponents while undermining Constitutional protections.Quote:
Originally Posted by noonwitch
The claim that "they all do it" is a crock, that simply lowers the bar for all politicians. And the fact is that while many of them do lie, we can always count on Democrats not to care when the lie is told by a Democrat, no matter how much that lie insults our intelligence, or how base the motives of the liar are.
That puts hussein in the same category as the phony Vietnam "hero veterans". He's trying to portray himself as someone he isn't in order to gain, in his mind, a measure of self respect that he lacks. Backdrop that against all the "me" and "I" you hear in his teleprompted speeches. He wants to be something bigger than what he knows of himself.Quote:
“Have you ever fired a gun?
Yes, in fact, up at Camp David, we do skeet shooting all the time.
He's a phony, and deep inside, he's insecure because he knows that he's a phony. A lot of that came out in his autobiography. He steals credit from those around him who succeed, and blames anything that could be laid at his feet as president as somebody else's fault.
I wish a psychological profile of him would be made public. He's a sick man, and he has to lie.
He's a POS. True dat. It's not our fault you ran Romney. I would have voted for Gingrich. But you had a pecking order starting with stupid and superstitious and working your way up from him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bailey
This is the one statement that proves my(and your) theory that liberals are nothing more than teenagers who refused to grow up. Actually, they're 7 year olds who refuse to grow up. I mean, talk about a group of people who you constantly have to tell "if they jumped off a cliff, would you do it too?"Quote:
The claim that "they all do it" is a crock