Did you know Hagel is spelled with an “I”?
Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel – not President Obama – executed the administration’s final call to proceed with the prisoner exchange of five ranking Taliban detainees for Sgt. Bowe Bergdahl, administration officials told Congress today in a classified briefing today.
“They indicated [it was] Secretary Hagel [who made the final call],” House Armed Services Chairman Buck McKeon, R-California, told reporters following the briefing Monday evening. “It was the president of the United States that came out [in the Rose Garden] with the Bergdahls and took all the credit and now that there’s been a little pushback he’s moving away from it and it’s Secretary Hagel?”
Officials also told Congress that 80 to 90 people within the administration knew of its plans to go forward with the controversial swap, exacerbating tensions between the White House and members of Congress.
“They made it clear that there were 80 to 90 people who knew ahead of time about the Bergdahl release,” Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minnesota, a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, told reporters. “There was a sense of anger that members of Congress didn’t know about this. Obviously, if there is secure information — members of Congress knew about the capture of Osama bin Laden — and yet 80 to 90 staff in the White House knew about this.”
While Bachmann says administration officials insist no members of Congress were informed before the exchange, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has repeatedly said he found out.
More at ABC News
Why it seems like just yesterday…
“This is something that I would do again, and I will continue to do wherever I have an opportunity, if I have a member of our military who’s in captivity,” Obama told NBC News.
“I”, as in Hagel. I guess.
Obama is losing Reid over this.
Sgt. Hagel is a convenient fall guy.
I doubt he is even smart enough to do anything but throw himself under the bus.
I would expect nothing different from such a worthless, despicable piece of contemptible, cowardly filth like Obama.
@Pete: It’s not so much about what you’d expect but rather how you chose to perceive it. It has nothing to do with what Obama does or doesn’t do but has everything to do with the fact that it’s Obama. Surely you’re not so dishonest as to disagree with that?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Just because you progressives are not smart enough to separate what a person says from what they do, doesn’t mean everyone lacks that ability. Stop trying to judge others by your own ineptness.
@retire05: I’m not judging the profound bigotry of you (and by “you” I’m referring to you as well as the regular and newly named cloned sockpuppets who parrot your every mindset on this site) as you openly demonstrate it on a daily basis. I’m simply challenging you to at least be honest with yourself (as you’ve proven that any other form of honesty has indeed been a tall order here).
You don’t hate Obama for his policies or how he’s govern but rather you hate him because he’s Barack Obama. You know that. I know that. And any reader with an iota of intellect knows that.
Why can’t you simply admit that?
And to clarify, I’m not saying you hate him because he’s a black President (although I certainly wouldn’t rule that out) but rather you hate him because of his party affiliation.
@Ronald J. Ward:
How quick you are to throw out the race card, RJW. When you have no defense of what Obama does, you accuse others of being bigoted, or simply racist.
I don’t give a tinker’s damn what color a politician is. I do care what they do. And Obama has done nothing, NOTHING, to make this nation better and lemmings like you seem to be too damn stupid to understand how he is destroying this nation.
Obama promised to fundamentally transform this nation. He never said how. Now we see. As hundreds of thousands of illegals are swarming our borders like bees, and the Border Patrol is sending out stress signals due to the inaction of this misadministration, you will continue to back Obama simply because he is black. That can be the only reason you willfully defend the man who is now on a path to destroy the Republic that all of us have known, and loved, our entire lives.
What happens when you are adversely affected by Obama’s actions? Will you blame someone else like you did yesterday? Will you claim that Republicans, who hold one half of one third of the government are the reason like you did yesterday? My God, man, get your head out of the sand.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Liar. That is exactly what you accused me of. Do I hate Democrats? No, I think most of them are decent people, Harry Reid being the exception to that rule, but just misguided lemmings who think you can legislate charity. I have voted for a lot of Democrats in my lifetime (JFK campaign being the first one I worked on) and there is no more Democrat Party. You progressives have purged the party of all blue-dogs getting more socialist with each decade.
Put your dog eared race card in the trash, RJW. Its past its shelf life.
@retire05: But can I safely say that you despise President Barack Obama and share Pete’s opinion that he’s a “worthless, despicable piece of contemptible, cowardly filth”? Or do you disagree with Pete?
Oh, and I didn’t throw out the race card when I called you a bigot. I even clarified that. What part of English stumps you so? Or better yet, why do you make up such incredibly stupid shit? Why is honest debate so challenging for you?
@Ronald J. Ward: Perhaps you could tell us the wonderful things Mr. Obama has accomplished to make us love him?
@Bill Burris: Well, yeah, I suppose I could engage in that sophomoric diversion while your fellow sock puppets run from my question.
But aside from your distraction, I’m not trying to convince anyone into loving Barack Obama. I’m simply wondering if the regular Obama bashers here can simply man up and admit they hate their President because of who he is rather than for his policies.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Perhaps you can show where I have ever said anything remotely close to what you are accusing me of? Talking about making shit up. You’re da man when it comes to that.
And what part of the U.S. Constitution stumps you that you continually defend a president that violates that document?
Because it is hard for me to sink to your level.
And “honest” would not be an adjective that I would apply to you. You’re one of the most dishonest people to ever show up here, not to mention being a liar, to boot.
@Ronald J. Ward:
No surprise that your limited mental capacity will not permit you to think that people could dislike Obama over his policies, not the color of his skin. But that lack does seem to be epidemic in the left.
@retire05: @retire05: But you come up short from saying that you don’t despise the Obamas or that you don’t agree with Pete. Pete said Obama was “a worthless, despicable piece of contemptible, cowardly filth”. Since you engaged in my question to Pete (who it appears has thrown a rock and ran), why not produce the testicle fortitude and say if you agree with Pete’s assessment?
@Ronald J. Ward:
No, I just don’t meet unreasonable demands from people like you. I dislike Obama because his policies are harmful to this nation. And Pete is entitled to say what ever he wishes. I am not responsible for what Pete says nor do I have to defend him.
When are you going to answer questions put to you by myself and others? Talk about playing games; you demand others answer you but when you get your ass in a sling, you run and hide just like you accuse others of doing. I asked you a question yesterday. You ran and hid.
Sorry, RJW, but even your comic value is diminishing.
@retire05: I understand that you don’t speak for Pete. Why you are so afraid to simply say if you agree with him that our sitting President of the United States is “a worthless, despicable piece of contemptible, cowardly filth” is unclear.
You ask me a question yesterday? To be honest, I seldom read your responses at all for reasons we’ve previously discussed and today’s being a perfect example. I just have some time to kill and couldn’t leave or get into anything else for a few hours so it was just one of those “what the hell” exceptions.
By the way, what are you and your identical cohorts so afraid of?
@Ronald J. Ward: #10. Ah, I get it. Sorry, I shouldn’t have asked a question impossible to answer. Asking what Obama has done to earn respect and affection is like asking what Hillary has done to improve foreign relations; how embarrassing it would be to answer honestly and simply say, “uh, nothing.”.
People who actually care about the health, strength and security of our nation despise the lies and failed agenda of Barack Hussein Obama. I don’t know the man, but what I see not only does he not like people like me, conservative and patriotic, but he does not like a strong, powerful and influential United States of America.
Your excuses, particularly in light of your inability to identify a single success of his own that we, the people, should appreciate, fall flat.
@Bill Burris: So, uh, you don’t know the man but have deduced, based on what you’ve seen, that he doesn’t like conservatives or people that are patriotic.
Um, fair enough I suppose as you’re entitled to you opinion. Would you also agree with Pete’s opinion that he’s ““a worthless, despicable piece of contemptible, cowardly filth”?
@Ronald J. Ward: I would only observe that you cannot answer the question I posed to you, yet you demand an answer to a question that has no answer since you insist the answer is not the answer that YOU refuse to respond with but the imaginary and invented answer you concocted.
Whew!! That was a long one, so let me distill it; you insist everyone hates Obama because he is Obama yet you can offer nothing that would prove all his disrespect he shows to citizens has improved the national condition.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You are the dishonest one, RJW. My disgust and disdain for Barack Obama is PRECISELY because his pro-marxist, pro-muslim, anti-American policies, coupled with his extreme lack of integrity, blatant lies, and actions are harming this country.
I despise the Clintons for the same reasons. And you can lump Kerry, Reid, Pelosi, Schumer, De Blasio, and every other stinking, lying, worthless leftist in with them. The difference is you leftists cannot understand that disagreement does not engender the loathing which Obama and his ilk so rightly deserve. It is the vile, pernicious behavior for leftists to LIE and feign concern for the wellbeing of their fellow man, when in reality the leftist is working to enslave everyone on their political plantation.
If your insanely stupid leftist ideas were ever capable of working, you wouldn’t have to lie to fool people into going along with you, or force them at the point of the government gun to obey.
A couple days ago Obama made this decision (or maybe Hagel did.)
Then it proved awfully unpopular EVEN with their fellow Democrats!
Note: Sen. Feinstein, Sen. Reid now claim they were not informed and that they learned about it from the WH, not from Defense last week.
Dutch Ruppersberger, the senior Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, said on Tuesday that the trade set a ‘dangerous precedent that puts all Americans at risk throughout the world.’
A dozen Democratic Senators refused to put their approval on record when asked on Tuesday.
Even Bowe Bergdahl is refusing to toe Obama’s line.
He refuses to speak with his parents and
He refuses to accept his promotion to Sgt.
He may end up locked away until after Obama leaves office just so he doesn’t embarrass Obama more than the trade did.
So, unless some Dems have become what liberals call anyone not agreeing with them, you know, self-hating?, they simply honestly DISAGREE with what Obama did.
Maybe liberals need a new denigrating phrase for independent thinkers, like ”self-hating gays, house n!gg@rs, breeders,” and so on.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Then don’t complain, like a sniveling little two year old, when others don’t jump through your hoops to answer your questions. FYI, most people are not going to play by your childish rules as they recognize you as nothing more than a troll who comes here to spew your progressive talking points.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You can take your pathetic race card and shove it right up your anocranially positioned amygdala.
You are, quite simply, too goat-humpingly stupid to recognize that it is Obama’s anti-American policies and his character defining dishonety with which he first weakens the US, then denies what he is doing, that justifies the contempt we have for such a fetid dung beetle as Barack Obama…..and Bill Clinton….and Harrey Reid…., Nancy Pelosi…..and every other lying filth bomb you democrats keep choosing to represent you.
The fact that you have nothing to refute the valid opposition we present…..so you toss down the race card….says volumes about your inability to engage in rational thought.
Your idol is a buffoonish poseur who has proven himself incapable of producing anything worthwhile or beneficial. He is a “constitutional lawyer” who railed against Bush for allegedly bypassing congress – yet Obama has done so repeatedly, with some judges calling his acts impeachable now.
And our hard fought victory in Iraq, because of Obama’s dipshit understanding of war and foreign policy, has now led to Al Qaeda controlling Mosul and capturing US military vehicles and weapons left behind when Obama decided to just pull out.
I really really want the US to separate nations. Let the states vote.to go red or blue, and let them divide. People have 3 months to move to a state of their preference if they don’t like the way their state votes, but after three months, you are stuck in the blue or red nation. Split up the debt based on the population divide, and let military personnel select which side, red or blue, they wish to serve. Then you leftists could go your socialist/marxist way, and we could go our capitalist, judeochristian way. If your vaunted philosophy works so well, then you bluebloods shod just zip right onto the success train to your collectivist utopia without all us knuckledragging rednecks holding you back, right?
But you would NEVER agree to that….because you can’t stand not having control over people because you can’t accept that they might be more successful than you.
@Ronald J. Ward:
Your pathetic Alinsky tactics are duly noted.
Obama’s acts as president reveal him to be totally incompetent. His foreign policy is one disgrace after another for our Country. Obama is a serial liar. His signature piece of legislation now has – per the left leaning Brookings Institution poll – 48% of Americans wanting complete repeal of obamacare. He broke the law in his trade of 5 terrorists for a deserter, initially claiming credit then coming out in the last 24 hours trying to push the blame off on his moronic SecDef when even Dem Sen Feinstein called his terrorist trade illegal. So yeah, craven is a good assessment of Obama’s character.
So yes, I stand by my statement that Obama is a worthless, contemptible, cowardly piece of filth. The only change I would make is adding in the word “lying” right after cowardly.
I have to wonder if Ron even understands what a ”sock puppet,” is.
There have been only a few sock puppets online.
Glenn Greenwald was outed as a sock-puppet when he used a phony name to write glowing reviews of his own writing.
Scott Adams, the cartoonist famous for creating Dilbert, created a sock puppet called PlannedChaos to try to make his own editorial look like people liked it when they didn’t.
John Mackey, the CEO of Whole Foods, created a sock puppet to defend himself.
The US military’s Central Command, under Obama, awarded a $2.7 million contract to Ntrepid, a newly-formed Los Angeles-based startup, to create fake online “personae” (sock puppets) for the purpose of manipulating online conversations and spreading propaganda in social media.
The Obama Admnistration was thus trying to create a FALSE consensus on line about Obama’s policies.
@RonaldWard#10
You can’t be serious Ronald…
One can see you are totally “stuck” in the Liberal “Your a Racist” rhetoric. Why? Because you Ronald cannot ‘honestly’ defend Obama or many of the Democrats in that party. AND because Ronald, you seriously are a lemming.
@Ronald J. Ward:
That is absolutely ridiculous. Did the left hate George W. Bush just because he was George W. Bush and a republican? I don’t think the majority of the left felt that way. I’m sure there were some that felt exactly that way. Just like I’m sure there are some on the right that feel that way about Obama. But the overwhelming majority of people on the right have an honest disagreement with his policies and his governance (or lack thereof). What is it about the left that if you disagree with them, you hate them? We’re not the ones banning people from speaking engagements. We’re not the ones trying to suppress differing opinions. You have guys on your side that want to jail people for not believing in global warming, climate change, climate disruption or whatever you want to call it this week.
@Aqua: Actually, that is pretty much why the left always hated Bush; because he is Bush or, rather, because he was NOT Gore. Even before the 2000 election, the left was denigrating Bush as that stupid, hick Texan that didn’t deserve to be in the same room with the extension of the Clinton utopia, Al Gore. Then, Bush defeated Gore and they hated him even more. So much so that they had to invent reasons to hate him, such as perpetrating 9/11 himself, going to war to avenge Daddy and war profiteering. Even inventing evidence to show he was a military slacker when none was conveniently existing.
Now, despite all the evidence around them, the left assumes this is why Obama is regarded as an utter failure. The left cannot see Obama’s administration in terms of job performance because they are all about ideology; nothing matters but ideology and having their ideology overtake all others, even as that ideology proves to be an economic, domestic and foreign affairs disaster.
Hagel has been testifying all this AM.
CSPAN has carried it.
You can watch it all and not learn one new thing!
He can’t even tell the House Armed Services Committee WHO made the decision to trade those 5 detainees for Bowe!
Over and over Hagel has made the point that Qatar has a ”new” emir.
So, we should be happy and trust him???
June 2013 Sheikh Tamim bin Khalifa Al Thani was named emir of Qatar.
He was backing the Arab Spring revolutions and siding with rebels fighting against authoritarian governments in Syria and Libya.
Those are ISLAMISTS!!!!
The SAME Islamists who just took Mosul and Takrit!
He is also close to the Muslim Brotherhood politically, in other words for a STRICT version of Sharia.
He has a couple of wives:
In 2005, he married his second cousin Sheikha Jawaher bint Hamad bin Suhaim Al Thani.
They have four children.
A second marriage in 2009 to Sheikha Anoud bint Mana al-Hajri brought two further children – in total, three sons and three daughters.
That form of Sharia.
If ANYONE cannot see what Obama is doing here…like a immature school boy…grabbing the “Glory” when things are good… “for HIM” or (“I” “I” “I”) – which is EXACTLY what he has done here…
However, when things go south and looking really bad “the won” (Obama) …. the GEARS, faster than the speed of light SWITCH…..
…. and the “Obama” BLAME GAME begins… Obama is so predictable.
I was under the impression that Obama ‘made it clear’ the buck stops with him??? That ‘he’ “takes full responsibility” for ‘his’ administration …Oh, I’m sorry I must have been mistaken…
Easy way out…. Blame it on others…
True signs of a coward… Of a Loser Liberal Leader.
@Pete:
Excellent suggestion. The left should jump on something like that because it would get rid of all of the evil conservatives. But they won’t. They know someone has to wipe their asses for them given that they are incapable of doing it themselves and that’s where we non lefties come in.
@Bill:
True.
And I understand why people with deep convictions voted for Obama over McCain or Romney. They truly believe in the democratic platform. Here’s what I don’t understand. These same people would have strokes if Bush did one quarter of the crap Obama has done. Can you imagine what the left would do if Bush took unilateral executive action to deport anyone in the country illegally? Yet these same people will sit and defend Obama’s unilateral actions. What if the Auto bailout implementation had been under Bush and instead of the bond holders and non-union companies getting the shaft, they union had walked away with sore buttocks? Bush didn’t even go into Iraq without congressional approval and the left still excoriated him. All the while, Obama takes unilateral action after unilateral action and the left blames it on republicans in the House. Doesn’t matter that this is the way our system was set up and was done so specifically to make things hard to change. It doesn’t matter what Obama does, the left will defend it.
@Bill: and @Aqua: Actually, people rallied GWB after 9/11 when his popularity soared. It was he that abused that trust with “lies” that Saddam attacked us and had WMDs. He “lied” when he stated “We must uncover every detail and learn every lesson of September the 11th” while using every resource to mislead and misrepresent data. How about “mission accomplished” and “We found the weapons of mass destruction”? It was his very actions, negative policy results, incompetence, and dishonesty that turned his constituents against him.
@Pete: (and your related gibberish), your argument that you hate him and Clinton because of their lies while omitting GWB and his “Read My Lips” daddy rings hollow. You don’t hate them because they lied but rather use their lying as justification for your deep seeded bigotry towards Democrats.
I would also note that he “lied” by telling us his tax cuts “would create millions of jobs, keep a balanced budget, and generate robust economic growth” and that ” My plan unlocks the door to the middle class of millions of hard-working Americans.” . He “lied” right up to the bitter end while declaring “the economy is on solid ground” when in fact we were nosediving to the greatest economic disaster since the Great Depression. Bush lied to us when he told us he first knew Enron’s Ken Lay in 1994. The Bush era of dishonesty simply goes on and on and on.
And it’s fairly simple to sling out feeble and vague excuses of hating Obama and Clinton for their “policies” and “damaging” or “harming” the country while much of these very policies deviate very little from that of Republican leaders. And they are indeed consistent with much of the policies Republican leaders have shared for years.
Consider that other Presidents have bowed to foreign leaders is paying respect but for Obama it’s treasonous.
Other Presidents have historically read to school children in classrooms while when Obama does it then it’s some diabolical indoctrination scheme.
14 similar “Benghazis” under Bush and 30 something others in the past 40 years are dismissed while the drum beating over just 1 under Obama is an impeachable offense (but then for Obama, what isn’t?).
Other Presidents can dress casually and kick back in the Oval office but for Obama it’s an act of profound disrespect.
Bush can release over 500 Gitmo prisoners which is fine but under Obama, 5 is, here we go again, impeachable.
What’s fair game for other presidents such as having “czars”, or vacationing, or issuing executive orders, or multiple debt ceiling hikes, or making recess appointments is all fine and good but when Obama does it, it’s scandalous or evil or dishonest or bad policy that harms the country.
If Clinton and Obama meets your vile criteria for their “policies” or “harming the country”, where might be some acknowledgment of Clinton’s 23 million job creations or Obama’s 51 straight months of steady job growth? Where is a “thank you” to Obama for “keeping our country safe” for the past 5+ years?
You and your bigoted cohorts can’t do that because “policies” and/or positive policy results have nothing to do with your admitted festered hatred towards political leaders that don’t march lockstep to your every mindset. You defend your claim that their lies renders them evil while accepting the dishonest behavior of anyone other than Clinton or Obama. And you do this while bold face lying through your teeth. That’s rather telling.
Obama’s claim that Hagel, not Obama, made the decision is at odds with what Hagel himself said on Meet the Press on June 1. “I signed off on the decision,” Hagel said. “The president made the ultimate decision.”
I think that’s all that needs to be said.
As long as it was going to be a PR coup, Obama was ready and willing to take the credit.
As soon as it became unpopular, Hagel meet bus…..
According to Buck McKeon, the chairman of the House Armed Services committee, the Obama administration’s briefers told he gathered House members that the person responsible for the decision to make the deal was not President Obama but Chuck Hagel, the secretary of defense.
Add another scandal to the barbie, mate!
@Ronald J. Ward: “Actually, people rallied GWB after 9/11 when his popularity soared.” For a while. A short while. Once the campaign season kicked in, it was “attack Bush”, even if the troops in combat had to be sacrificed to do it.
“It was he that abused that trust with “lies” that Saddam attacked us and had WMDs.” Oh, I see. The reason you have such an absurd, illogical position based solely on lies is all due to a misunderstanding. Show me where anyone in the Bush administration even hinted that Hussein attacked us? Show me where it was ever proven that anyone lied about the WMD’s in Iraq. See, your complete ignorance of the fact and truth has led to you making ridiculous statements and looking ridiculous. You should address that.
““We must uncover every detail and learn every lesson of September the 11th” while using every resource to mislead and misrepresent data.” Show us where any part of the inquiries, investigations and hearings into 9/11 were impeded in any way by anyone in the Bush administration. You know what the only dishonesty in the investigations and hearing was? Clinton sending Sandy Berger to the National Archives to stuff documents into his underwear and sneak them away. Lord knows what information was lost or what Clinton was so intent on keeping buried.
“How about “mission accomplished” and “We found the weapons of mass destruction”? “Mission Accomplished” was a banner put up by the crew of the USS Abraham Lincoln to commemorate THEIR mission accomplished. Exactly as I explained, you liberals could find so little to actually honestly attack Bush on (since he never promised “you can keep your doctor” or the most transparent administration or blah, blah, blah, etc, etc, etc) that you had to invent your insults… much like Rather did with his Air National Guard report.
“I would also note that he “lied” by telling us his tax cuts “would create millions of jobs, keep a balanced budget, and generate robust economic growth” and that ” My plan unlocks the door to the middle class of millions of hard-working Americans.” The tax cust DID create millions of jobs and cut deficits… too bad Obama cannot accomplish even one of those two. Obama has lied about Obamacare, tax cuts, deficits, jobs, unemployment, Fast and Furious, Benghazi, the NSA, the VA, the IRS, Snowden, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, Egypt, Russia, China, Iran, Bergdahl… good Lord, his lies could fill a set of encyclopedias. Thus far, you have only parroted made up lies you have to convince yourself Bush (even going back to Bush 41) told.
Hey, just because you were so blind and ignorant to vote for a community organizer and expect to get a President… twice… is not my fault. I know you feel embarrassed, conned and ashamed, but deal with it. Don’t take it out on others by lying.
@Bill: Why is it that every single pro FA contributor follows the very same playbook of spin and abject stupidity? The simple answer is that every single pro FA contributor is obviously the same pro FA contributor.
My “illogical position” being a “misunderstanding” seems to be the sole case that you build your spin on that “I’m” the one lying. That, like most irrational and non sequitur rebuttals to my arguments from the resident trolls here, that doesn’t make sense on any level. You even make the argument that “read my lips” is “parroted made up lies”. How does one even attempt to rationalize with one of such blatant dishonesty and/or ignorance?
Perhaps I misunderstood and Saddam did have WMD and he was the one that attacked us or that Bush’s promises of the tax breaks did materialized and that Obama was actually handed an economy on solid ground or the many many other arguments I presented above. Perhaps I got my numbers wrong on Clinton’s 23 million job growth and maybe GWHB never broke his “read my lips promise” and Republican Presidents never ever raised the debt limit and that Obama acquired the 1st “czar” and no other President ever took vacation or played golf or signed an executive order and that I’m wrong on the many many other examples I gave.
And obviously because of my lack of understanding, all of this is the reason I’m so damned embarrassed for not voting for more of those oh so misunderstood policies (which obviously makes me a liar) or, or, or what on God’s green earth is the hell you’re talking about?
Mass beheadings are being reported.
All of Tikrit is in the hands of the militants.
In Mosul.
Elsewhere.
Jihadists have seized a large swathe of the north.
ISIS is spearheading an offensive that began late on Monday and has since overrun all of Nineveh province and its capital Mosul as well as parts of Kirkuk to its southeast and Salaheddin to its south.
Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is the new leader of al-Qaeda in Iraq and Syria.
He was released from US custody four years ago. (Yeah, blame Bush, but Obama was president then.)
He is being financially backed by President Bashar al-Assad against the Western-backed government in Baghdad.
@Ronald J. Ward: No “perhaps” about it. You have gotten OH, so MUCH wrong.
Or, are you just repeating known lies? The Obama-support lies are becoming so fantastic it is simply difficult to tell the difference.
“My “illogical position” being a “misunderstanding” seems to be the sole case that you build your spin on that “I’m” the one lying” Well, you clear it up then; are you willfully lying or simply dead wrong about:
Hussein attacking the US
Lies about WMD’s
The “Mission Accomplished” banner
The effectively of tax cuts
The jobs and economic boom of the Bush administration
Bush 41 let his mouth overload his ass with his “no new taxes” mantra though, to be honest, tax hikes were not his idea but more forced upon him and made inevitable by his Democrat Congress. Nevertheless, he paid for it by being a one-term President. In that context, Obama’s “if I can’t turn the economy around in 3 1/2 years, I should be a one term President” should have been enough to keep him from further mayhem. But, people like you value ideology over a strong, healthy, growing America. So, it didn’t.
Obama has been an unmitigated, undeniable, absolute disastrous failure and YOU voted for it… twice. You STILL have not offered even a trumped up, easily disputed example of success; even YOU don’t think him successful at anything… you merely support the poor decisions of your past. Please, give your advice and warped opinions to someone else. I don’t waste time considering the thoughts of the incredible.
@Ronald J. Ward:
You are beyond stumbling drunk on your leftist kool-aid.
The “14 Benghazis” nonsense has been repeatedly debunked. There was no US ambassador murdered by an 8 hour terrorist attack under Bush, nor any cover up by the Bush admin of any such attack. There was never any terrorist attack under Bush where the administration knowingly, falsely blamed an unseen video for citing a non-existent protest as the impetus for a terrorist attack resulting in dead Americans.
Strong job growth under Obama? Laughable in light of 50 million on foodstamps and a 37% non-participation rate of the available US workforce, the highest since the 1970s under another democrat, Carter.
Bush’s “no new taxes” pledge was nixed by the dem controlled congress that forced him to raise taxes, which you would acknowledge if you had any integrity, just as the economic debacle.that occured under the second Bush was.due to the effect of the housing bubble rising from the Clinton era legislation that gave us subprime mortgages.
Your deliberate misuse of the word “bigotry” in describing opposition to the socialist policies pushed by democrats is typically laughable as you ignore your own such “bigotry” against conservatives. We get it. You worship at the altar of collectivism, and you mistakenly believe in your sanctimony that you have a morale right to force the rest of us to abide by your collectivist ideology. Our opposition to your position is about as bigotted as our disdain for malodorous garbage and being bitten by Texas mosquitoes.
@Ronald J. Ward:
I challenge you to cite a single lie I have ever written here. Your spewing bloviations are beyond desperate.
@Pete:
Great refutation, Pete.
I’d add that it looks like Ron is swallowing Obama’s promises as if they are fait accomplis.
They are not.
For instance, we’re 51 months into the 60-month timespan Obama gave himself to double exports.
How’s it look?
Here’s the truth:
For the past two years our exports have increased by an average of 2.3%, which is about the rate of inflation. In those two years exports have risen by less than $9 billion. They should have risen by $57 billion.
Obama has done nothing to help, either.
Watching Exports Go Nowhere (June 2014)
Another example:
How is Obama doing with his manufacturing jobs promise?
At the DNC convention in 2012 Obama promised he’d add 1 million manufacturing jobs in 4 years.
OOPS!
Stop drinking the Kool Aid!
@Bill: @Pete: As usual, we have 2 different names who both rewrite history in order to somehow win the argument, simply making up stupid shit out of thin air. You are both incorrect in stating that GWHB was forced by Democrats (which even that argument, if true, doesn’t stand up to scrutiny) to break his pledge and raise taxes. It was actually Daddy Bush himself that put new taxes on the table as he publicly stated:
That statement as I recall and actual history mandates, brought the ire of many Republicans including Newt and VP Dan Quail. Pat Buchanan made the statement
When you make statements that are simply outright lies and speak as if your made up lies are fact it’s hard to give credence to anything you say. But then again, it’s hard to give credence to anything you say regardless.
@Ronald J. Ward: You are, of course, missing the larger point. You are missing it purposely because you are hypocritical. You are willfully missing the larger point because you do not want to admit you are making my own point for me.
We know Bush 41’s “no new taxes” mantra was proven a false promise. You can even call it a lie, if you insist, but you would have to prove that he always intended to raise taxes as he was promising no new taxes; obviously, from his reluctance to only do this as a last resort, proves otherwise. However, you may go right ahead and ignore fact and the time-space continuum and live within your own sphere of fantasy. It’s OK; it just further proves my point.
So, eventually, Bush raised taxes and his promise NOT to raise taxes was used beat him viciously about the head and shoulders, politically. Bush had no economic failure, he had no domestic policy failures and he most certainly had no foreign policy failures. He lost his second term exclusively because of “Read my lips: NO NEW TAXES!” I think we both agree that when a representative makes that sort of blunder, they deserve to pay the political price for it.
So, this brings us to your Lord and Savior, Lord Darth Obama, the most wonderful man on the planet. First, I admit that many of his greatest lies were not generally discovered until after he was reelected; any observant person interested in knowing the truth could have seen this coming, but without an honest media to vet and actually cover stories, I can fully understand how someone with a deep desire to simply will certain things to be true, if even in their own minds, the open signs could have been overlooked. However…
He promised to be the most transparent and honest administration in history. By the time Obamacare was signed into law (it has yet to be enacted), that was obviously a lie. He promised his $865 billion “stimulus” would keep unemployment below 7.9%; lie. Unemployment hit 10.2%. He promised the “stimulus” would create millions of “shovel ready jobs; lie. It was a surreptitious scheme to feed taxpayer dollars into the hands of his campaign contributors who dutifully returned millions of that back to the Democrat and Obama campaigns. He promised Obamacare would lower health care costs; that was shown to be a lie long before the law was even partially put into effect. He promised no lobbyists would be given jobs in his administration; lie. He promised reduce racial tensions; huge lie, as he goes out of his way to exacerbate racial tension and to create it where none exists. He promised Obamacare would not raise taxes on the middle class “one thin dime”; that is a lie as raising fees, regulations and taxes on everything around those in the middle class, as Obamacare has done, raises taxes on the middle classes. When costs go up, someone pays the greater costs and that someone is the middle class. He promised to create millions of green jobs; one of the larger first term lies (that we had full awareness of) since not only did he spend billions on green industry, most of it went (again) to campaign supporters, repaying them their personal losses in businesses supported by the taxpayers that went bankrupt. He, of course, lied about a video being the cause of death for four Americans, including an ambassador.
No doubt this is not a comprehensive list of all his first term, openly revealed lies, but I am trying to separate those from the lies we have been made aware of since the election. Now that he has gained election, he is not so careful about keeping the lies buried.
Quite possibly the greatest lie of all (other than the over-arching lie of Obama claiming to be capable of filling the office of President) was the “you can keep your insurance… you can keep your doctor. Period.” This is a much more gigantic lie than “Read my lips” because we now know that, from day one, Obama knew he was lying. While Bush promised not to raise taxes and failed to accomplish that, Obama knew his plan was to wreck the health care coverage of every American that had their own coverage in favor of herding them into a system of his device which would raise their rates, reduce their coverage in order to rob taxpayers of as much money as possible to pay for votes.
So, Mr. Ward, if you believe, as you say, vehemently, you do, that Bush 41 should be crucified for his “lie” (which he was, politically), then how is it that you don’t believe the same fate should have befallen Obama for his many and various lies of his first term? While you will certainly deny he lied (right up to claiming you actually believe the economy is doing well and all those unemployed have been “liberated” from having to work by the wonders of Obamacare’s ability to kill full time jobs) but the actual fact is he lied and lied often. It was obvious he failed to protect the consulate in Benghazi and he lied about a video as being the cause. We had lots of evidence he had lied about people keeping their insurance. We knew he lied about the stimulus; both its actual purpose and what it would accomplish. He even lied when he said if he did not turn the economy around in 31/2 years he would not deserve a second term (well, perhaps he actually honestly believes he doesn’t deserve to be President, but stays around for the sweet, taxpayer funded vacations). Yet you don’t feel you (or anyone else) should hold him accountable for any of this.
Why are your standards only high for non-liberals but you can happily accept utter failure from those you have chosen to follow? That is a perplexing question.
@BB#43 – I am willing to bet the ‘reasons’ (rapidly deteriorating health??/timing??/Presidential ‘rights’ to making decisions void of Constitutional Laws -30 day notice ) being presented by this Administration for the (1) soldier for five, count them (5) Taliban Terrorists are also a ‘lie’…another you can add to your “Obama lie list”. I am sure we will find out soon enough.
As Hagel has been parroting over and over (on C-SPAN today on the exchange) these were : ‘exceptional circumstances’ an ‘extraordinary situation’
And I’m thinking…yea,
…much like Benghazi ‘was not’ – right Hagel?
@Ronald J. Ward:
Riiiight. You are one of the most contemptible history twisting liars out there. Pardon my delay in respond8ng to your dishonest history revisionism , as I am flying back from one city to my home after working in a hospital that has a shortage of my type of intensive care doctors because of the national shortage of physicians…
Bush number one was arguably a RINO, but he made the pledge not to raise taxes when running for president in the 1988 election. It was not, as you dishonestly are trying to imply, Bush who came up with the idea to raise taxes after he was elected. It was the democrat controlled congress that insisted that taxes needed to be raised, and Bush the first was too much of a RINO to tell the dem controlled congress to shove it up their collectivist asses as he should have done. He caved, for which we conservatives condemned him. For you to imply that it was Bush’s idea to raise taxes, and the dem controlled congress reluctantly went along proves you are nothing but a sniveling liar. The fact that conservatives criticized Bush for caving to the dems only proves that conservatives stand for principles over idols, which you leftists cannot understand as you fellate the likes of Clinton and Obama. Inconveniently for you liars, some of us were ALIVE when this debacle occured, and we remember how the dem congress maneuvered, and Bush #1 CAVED. See, unlike you leftists, we conservatives actually have principles. The fact that you acknowledge that conservatives attacked the first Bush for going back on his promise, then condemn conservatives because we stuck to our principles by condemning him shows your inherent intellectual dishonesty and your inability to engage in rational thought processes. You are, by your own writings, an ignorant ass.