Random Political Thoughts

[b_dubb]

I think you're overlooking an adulterer's vulnerability*

you're right of course.  but my friend who works in Air Force Intelligence tells me that basically everyone at WPAFB is boning / being boned by someone else in the Mil.  he made it sound like being faithful to a spouse was the exception to the rule.  so while it may be "illegal" it doesn't seem like anyone is enforcing it.  unless FOX news starts leading with the story

[analog kid]

I am not sure why you suppose there should be one unified theory at this point.  It seems to me that even scientists studying the universe have differing approaches.

Because bitter nitwit John McCain is trying to make political hay out of it, and he's having trouble choosing between the Reptilians and the Illuminati.

[PB the Deplorable]

But what about our incoherent gharble of right-wing conspiracies, huh? The right can't even decide on which Benghazi conspiracy angle to agree on and go with. Help was sent, but the attack was over before they got there. Can you come up with a concern that isn't based on Glenn Beck style conspiracy crap? I don't think so.

I don't like being lied to by anybody - inside politics or out - D or R.   George W Bush lied us into 2 unwinnable wars - with the associated huge waste of money and the human tradegy that came with the deaths and permantent physical and mental damage to our American soldiers fighting there.  That all might have been avoided if the right questions had been asked ahead of time.  Hearings and oversite is Congresses job.  And, frankly, the Media's - that is why they are included in the First Amendment.

Shouldn't it outrage every single person that the Obama Administration and the Corrupt Media have lied constantly about Benghazi, are still covering up, and that key officials are conveniently not available for questioning.

Maybe part of the reason there are so many different theories is because there have been so many conflicting stories coming out of the White House.

[Sardondi]

House GOP: Obama officials using secret emails to avoid oversight.

"The evidence of officials’ efforts to evade transparency laws includes EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson’s use of the fake name “Richard Windsor”, and hidden e-mail accounts."
http://dailycaller.com/2012/11/16/house-committee-probes-administrations-secret-emails/

Oh, c'mon, man - all I'm asking for is a break, just for a little while. Just behave like we have to - that's all I'm asking.

[analog kid]

I don't like being lied to by anybody - inside politics or out - D or R.

And yet Mitt Romney was the the right's Presidential candidate? Has he said anything that was actually true throughout his entire campaign?

Shouldn't it outrage every single person that the Obama Administration and the Corrupt Media have lied constantly about Benghazi, are still covering up, and that key officials are conveniently not available for questioning.

Can you show me the evidence that this is actually happening? Not saying it isn't, but I take everything coming from the inteligencia that gave us birtherism with a grain of salt.

[analog kid]

The CIA asked Congress & the White House not to refer to the Benghazi attacks as terrorism "to avoid revealing to insurgents that American intelligence agencies were eavesdropping on their electronic communications." Republicans in congress knew this, even as they attacked Obama for it.

[RealCool Daddio]

The CIA asked Congress & the White House not to refer to the Benghazi attacks as terrorism "to avoid revealing to insurgents that American intelligence agencies were eavesdropping on their electronic communications." Republicans in congress knew this, even as they attacked Obama for it.

You mean congressional Republicans are being duplicitous, and trying to play politics with the deaths of American service people abroad? Where is the outrage from our hard right folks on Coastgab?

[b_dubb]

the one side accuses the other of wrong doing which turns out to be bullshit and turns out their side was actively engaging in said illegal bullshit

there. contemporary politics in the USA. esplained

[Nucky Nolan]

the one side accuses the other of wrong doing which turns out to be bullshit and turns out their side was actively engaging in said illegal bullshit

there. contemporary politics in the USA. esplained

That's why we need a third party. The constant rumbles between the two gangs don't serve our country well. We need to get past the political tribalism of "my party, right or wrong". Sadly, we're almost forced into these tribes.

[PB the Deplorable]

The CIA asked Congress & the White House not to refer to the Benghazi attacks as terrorism "to avoid revealing to insurgents that American intelligence agencies were eavesdropping on their electronic communications." Republicans in congress knew this, even as they attacked Obama for it.

Doesn't pass the smell test, sorry.

Not trying to be difficult, but are we supposed to believe the attackers think CIA/State/Obama really thought it was a spontaneous uprising about some video no one saw, and that CIA/State/Obama would never have guessed they were in league with or part of al-Qaeda and other groups - who were operating in the open in Benghazi?


After spending the week huddlling and getting their story straight (while the Media focused us on the 'scandal'), the people that lied from the start are still lying.  They must be holding something big over Petraeus' head (like prison time and his pension) to get him to go along with this.  The cover-up continues.

[RealCool Daddio]

Doesn't pass the smell test, sorry.

Not trying to be difficult, but are we supposed to believe the attackers think CIA/State/Obama really thought it was a spontaneous uprising about some video no one saw, and that CIA/State/Obama would never have guessed they were in league with or part of al-Qaeda and other groups - who were operating in the open in Benghazi?


After spending the week huddlling and getting their story straight (while the Media focused us on the 'scandal'), the people that lied from the start are still lying.  They must be holding something big over Petraeus' head (like prison time and his pension) to get him to go along with this.  The cover-up continues.

You would make an excellent guest for Noory.  Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, you will defend your position to the bitter end.  You are Coastgab's Richard Hoagland, Ed Dames and Sir Charles Schultz, all rolled up into one big colostomy bag of conspiracy theory and denial.

[PB the Deplorable]

You would make an excellent guest for Noory.  Despite mountains of evidence to the contrary, you will defend your position to the bitter end.  You are Coastgab's Richard Hoagland, Ed Dames and Sir Charles Schultz, all rolled up into one big colostomy bag of conspiracy theory and denial.

Maybe.  How about we wait and see how this all plays out. 

Keep in mind we haven't heard Obama tell the truth about much of anything in 4 years, so why would this be different (the Left knows they can't be honest about their policies and ideas and have people in this country agree and go along - they also know the Media will lie and cover for them).  Here are some examples from just the week running up to the election and after: 

Iran shoots down a US drone over the Persain Gulf a few days before the election - and we don't hear a thing about it until after the election.  Obama campaigns heavily in swing-state Colorado talking up their oil shale and releated jobs - and a few days after the election he closes vast amounts of it to drilling.  Reported Employment mysteriously goes up before the election - and down by just as much right after.

And we're supposed to roll over with relief when they tell what is surely looks like the next lie?   Do you really believe al-Qaeda doesn't know the US govt is aware of their activity in Libya, and is doing their best to track them?  Dang, dude.  Truly a product of the US Media.


My suggestion:  you and Onam and whoever else use the scroll on the right to just bypass my posts.  Save yourselves the aggravation.

[Sardondi]

Patient: Doctor, I'm troubled about a recurring dream in which a sizable meteor strikes the Capitol during a State of the Union address, proving instantly fatal to the entirety of the three branches of federal government, and leaving the nation completely without leadership.

Doctor: Such recurring nightmares aren't unusual....

Patient: Uh, Doctor, what's troubling is that it's a recurring fantasy, not a nightmare.....

[Juan]

The trouble with these "facts" is that none of us have heard from the witnesses - only what politicians say the witnesses said.  I don't believe any of them.

[analog kid]

Doesn't pass the smell test, sorry.

Not trying to be difficult, but are we supposed to believe the attackers think CIA/State/Obama really thought it was a spontaneous uprising about some video no one saw, and that CIA/State/Obama would never have guessed they were in league with or part of al-Qaeda and other groups - who were operating in the open in Benghazi?


After spending the week huddlling and getting their story straight (while the Media focused us on the 'scandal'), the people that lied from the start are still lying.  They must be holding something big over Petraeus' head (like prison time and his pension) to get him to go along with this.  The cover-up continues.

So Petraeus and the rest of the CIA, FBI and the military are all lying. Why is it now hard to believe a retaliation happened over a video? A riot started and people were killed over a one panel cartoon depicting their prophet, and again when a pastor in Florida burned Korans. But now such a thing is entirely unbelievable, and you somehow even know whether any Muslim has seen the video.

[PB the Deplorable]

So Petraeus and the rest of the CIA, FBI and the military are all lying. Why is it now hard to believe a retaliation happened over a video? A riot started and people were killed over a one panel cartoon depicting their prophet, and again when a pastor in Florida burned Korans. But now such a thing is entirely unbelievable, and you somehow even know whether any Muslim has seen the video.

That's not even what they are claiming - we are weeks past claiming it was about some video.  That was the pre-debate lie, or I should say it was the first of the pre-debate stories they put out.  The President himself went around claiming he never said that and claiming that he had called it Terrorism from the start.   Live and in person at the debates.  Remember?  Candie Crowley walked him through it if you recall.

The current story is they knew everything all along but put out the different stories so al-Qaeda wouldn't know we were aware of them and tracking them.  Really?  These rats in Libya don't think we are trying to track them?  Isn't that why we have Special Forces all over the Sahara - if I know that and the Media knows it, I'm pretty sure 'al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb' already knows it.


But just to go over it, yes, it is entirely unbelievable that some Libyan friends of ours were out celebrating the 9/11 anniversay, somewhere along the way they happened upon a YouTube video that had been there for months, and decided to break into a spontaneous riot.  And they just happened to have rocket propelled grenades and fully automatic machine guns with them and enough rounds to go at it for hours.



Know what - you folks can believe any darn thing you want.  If you are so releived that Team Obama has finally said something - anything - to a Congressional committee and can swallow it, and are so desperate for the rest of us to 'Move On', then go for it.  No matter how pathetic.


This is what we get when the only source of news a person will consider is the Main Stream Media, and one of the parties is treated as Truth Givers.   What I'd like to know is what exactly did the MSM and the D's do to gain everyone's complete trust, and when did they do it?

[analog kid]

That's not even what they are claiming - we are weeks past claiming it was about some video.  That was the pre-debate lie, or I should say it was the first of the pre-debate stories they put out.  The President himself went around claiming he never said that and claiming that he had called it Terrorism from the start.   Live and in person at the debates.  Remember?  Candie Crowley walked him through it if you recall.

Can you show me where anyone in the White House is now denying having attributed the attack on the video? Was the administration supposed to know exactly what transpired immediately after it happened?

The current story is they knew everything all along but put out the different stories so al-Qaeda wouldn't know we were aware of them and tracking them.  Really?  These rats in Libya don't think we are trying to track them?  Isn't that why we have Special Forces all over the Sahara - if I know that and the Media knows it, I'm pretty sure 'al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb' already knows it.

No it isn't. The CIA wanted the administration and congress to refrain from calling it a terrorist attack. Investigations as to what transpired and who was involved is still ongoing. I honestly fail to see the controversy.

But just to go over it, yes, it is entirely unbelievable that some Libyan friends of ours were out celebrating the 9/11 anniversay, somewhere along the way they happened upon a YouTube video that had been there for months, and decided to break into a spontaneous riot.  And they just happened to have rocket propelled grenades and fully automatic machine guns with them and enough rounds to go at it for hours.

You're assuming an awful lot here.

This is what we get when the only source of news a person will consider is the Main Stream Media, and one of the parties is treated as Truth Givers.   What I'd like to know is what exactly did the MSM and the D's do to gain everyone's complete trust, and when did they do it?

Not only has multiple studies shown that people who consume right-wing media exclusively are the least informed in the country - less informed even than people who watch no news (quite an accomplishment), but the country / world has just gotten a startling look at the fact bubble the right exists in with their wrong consensus on how the elections were going to turn out. Even Romney and Ryan were drinking the kool-aid. The right has had their own facts, history and science all along, but now they have their own polls and math as well. Just listen to what some in the Republican establishment have been saying for the past few weeks.

[slipstream]

Can you show me where anyone in the White House is now denying having attributed the attack on the video? Was the administration supposed to know exactly what transpired immediately after it happened?

When I see two or three pieces of evidence from the field showing this was about a video I will believe it.  However, the administration has yet to produce any evidence that it was about a video.  All we have is their word, and that is not good enough.

No it isn't. The CIA wanted the administration and congress to refrain from calling it a terrorist attack. Investigations as to what transpired and who was involved is still ongoing. I honestly fail to see the controversy.

Then they should not have blamed it on a video.  They should have said that an investigation was on going as to why the CIA annex was attacked.


Which leads me to another thought.  The CIA annex was attacked on the night the ambassador was having meetings with a Turkish official, and this just happens to be the same night a bunch of folks find out about a video.  Yeah, maybe, but not likely.

[PB the Deplorable]

... No it isn't. The CIA wanted the administration and congress to refrain from calling it a terrorist attack. Investigations as to what transpired and who was involved is still ongoing. I honestly fail to see the controversy...

I would be delighted to find out that everything possible was done to rescue the Ambassador, that Obama is on the side of Muslims fighting Jihad and oppression and is not supporting Jihad and oppression, that the Libyan guns finding their way into Northern Mali (al-Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb) were not sent in with the assistance and blessing of the US. 

I really would.

But this is an Administration recently caught practically red-handed running guns to the Mexican Narco-gangs, in a misguided attempt to do.. who knows what (and we aren't going to find out what because Obama decided to cover it up by misuse of Executive Privilege).  A President that seems just a little too cozy with Islamic Jihad.  A President that appears to be undermining the US every chance he gets economically and abroad. 

They don't get the benefit of the doubt anymore.  This all needs to be looked at by someone outside that Party - specifically by the Congress.

... Not only has multiple studies shown that people who consume right-wing media exclusively are the least informed in the country - less informed even than people who watch no news (quite an accomplishment), but the country / world has just gotten a startling look at the fact bubble the right exists in with their wrong consensus on how the elections were going to turn out. Even Romney and Ryan were drinking the kool-aid. The right has had their own facts, history and science all along, but now they have their own polls and math as well. Just listen to what some in the Republican establishment have been saying for the past few weeks.

The ghetto dwellers, and the others that can't even take care of themselves, that make up the majority of the Democrat Party are more informed than the rest of us.  Seriously?  I'm guessing these studies are from the same people that gave us the 'Fact-checkers'.

I.e., if you agree with us that Socialism is the answer and fiscal responsibility and massive deficits are unimportant, you are more informed than anyone else.

[Pragmier]

Meanwhile Marco Rubio is too scared of the fundamentalists to give a straight answer.

“Whether the Earth was created in seven days, or seven actual eras,” Rubio continued, “I'm not sure we'll ever be able to answer that. It's one of the great mysteries.”

It's a mystery these guys are going to follow the same script.

[Juan]

He needs to learn to reply as Bill Clinton did - "Oh, that's a good one."  Then answer completely different question.

[Juan]

Rarely mentioned is the fact that Susan Rice is the person who advised Bill Clinton to NOT take bin Laden when he was offered by Somalia back in 1996.  I guess I'm racist for mentioning that.

[PB the Deplorable]

Today, MSNBC.com VP and Executive Editor Richard Wollfe today said "there is this witch hunt going on on the right about these people of color, let's face it, around this president, Eric Holder, Valerie Jarrett, now Susan Rice.  Before it was Van Jones..."

Never mind the volume of destructive politics, poor decisions, lies and coverups we've gotten from these people.  Never mind it's Wollfe that's singling out just the Administration advisors that are black for the purposes of this smear.

The intent of this one is clear - to try to stop at least some of the Rs from looking further into Susan Rice's Benghazi comments and the whole Benghazi mess, and to continue the story line that the Conservatives and Rs are racists.  To put everyone on notice that the election is over and if we continue to question government officials, we will be back to where we were before - at risk of being smeared by the Corrupt Media.



This is not an isolated remark by some minor rogue news hack - this kind of commentary seems to come out all the time, so much of it that people are numbed to it and it goes by unremarked, almost unnoticed.

This is the filth the Corrupt Media and the Left is constantly pumping into our body politic.  These are the people creating 'division' in our country (not the TEA Party).  This is why I have nothing but contempt for the Left, for the National Democrats in DC, the decision makers among top Libs and 'Progressives'.  This is why I don't trust their polls, their 'Fact-Checkers, their phony 'studies' - you know, the claims that don't make sense or 'pass the smell test' on their face.

But Fox News is the one we have to worry about, right? 

[Nucky Nolan]

Fox News is just one of them, Paperboy. We should be concerned about many sources of information, be they Left or Right, because they're biased and slanted in one way or the other. I have no illusions that we can find more than a few impartial, objective journalists anywhere. That includes conservative outlets.

[Juan]

I know a number of impartial, professional journalists.  Unfortunately, not one of us has a job - we can't even get an interview.

[Nucky Nolan]

I know a number of impartial, professional journalists.  Unfortunately, not one of us has a job - we can't even get an interview.

That should tell us something. The executives want puppets for Punch and Judy shows that are entertaining to hear, read, or see. They don't want presentations of the cold, hard facts, no matter in which political category they may fit. They want professional wrestling, where predetermined roles are assigned.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

My impression is they wanted as many 26 year olds at $14/hr as they could get.

[PB the Deplorable]

Fox News is just one of them, Paperboy. We should be concerned about many sources of information, be they Left or Right, because they're biased and slanted in one way or the other. I have no illusions that we can find more than a few impartial, objective journalists anywhere. That includes conservative outlets.

The reference to Fox News in my post about that creep from MSNBC was for the benefit of people that seem to dismiss only Fox News as the outlet not to be trusted.  Only those viewers are to be ridiculed.  From that I think it's implied the others are honest, fair, balanced, just looking for the truth, true journalists, etc.  They aren't.

[Nucky Nolan]

The reference to Fox News in my post about that creep from MSNBC was for the benefit of people that seem to dismiss only Fox News as the outlet not to be trusted.  Only those viewers are to be ridiculed.  From that I think it's implied the others are honest, fair, balanced, just looking for the truth, true journalists, etc.  They aren't.

I agree with that. I simply wanted to express my disappointment with the lack of neutral journalism. Media, from both the Left and the Right, stick to agendas and narratives with varying nods to opposing views. None of them have a monopoly on reality. I tend to favor Fox News because it fills a needed void in TV journalism. It indeed presents both sides of ideas and issues more than most of its alternative and mainstream competitors. However, it represents the Right in ways similar to how MSNBC represents the Left. As someone with some views that are sympatico with the Left, some presentations on Fox News seem lacking to me.

[PB the Deplorable]

I agree with that. I simply wanted to express my disappointment with the lack of neutral journalism. Media, from both the Left and the Right, stick to agendas and narratives with varying nods to opposing views. None of them have a monopoly on reality. I tend to favor Fox News because it fills a needed void in TV journalism. It indeed presents both sides of ideas and issues more than most of its alternative and mainstream competitors. However, it represents the Right in ways similar to how MSNBC represents the Left. As someone with some views that are sympatico with the Left, some presentations on Fox News seem lacking to me.

News on TV is possibly the worst way to get news anyway.  I haven't watched it in years, other than something like election returns or maybe something teased on the local news.  I've never watched Fox News because they appeared after I stopped watching any TV news.  Only so much can be fitted into a 30 or 60 minute time slot (minus commercials), and it ends up being shallow and one-sided.  They can only present  a cetain number of stories - left out are the ones that don't follow the narrative. 

To single out the one not marching in lockstep, always putting that one down, ridiculing only those viewers, trying to have as few people as possible hear an opposing view - constantly slamming Fox looks an awful lot like an attempt to have us limit ourselves to what they want us to see.