U.S. ambassador to Libya Killed - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/world/africa/libya-us-ambassador-killed/index.html?hpt=hp_t1)

The United States ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, was killed in a rocket attack on the U.S. Consulate in the city of Benghazi on Tuesday, President Obama said Wednesday.

I'd like to recommend a campaign stop for Barak and Joe since they don't have an hour to meet with the Netanyahu

These Muslim extremists are true barbarians. Someone they don't know posts something on youtube they don't like, and the response is to massacre the next Americans they see. Forget the fact that these Americans had nothing to do with the video.

JohnR, sometimes, in my weak moments, I think we should launch a few missles and turn that desert into glass.

Off topic, but I also thought it was interesting to hear Obama say "
the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others..."

Really? Then why do liberals say that Catholics are waging war on women, simply because the church doesn't want to be forced to provide that which it teaches is immoral? Isn't that denigrating the religious beliefs of others?

Everything is now OK: "Libya's Prime Minister Abdurrahim el-Keib apologized "to the American people and the government, and also to the rest of the world" for the "cowardly criminal act.":smash::smash::smash::smash:

BTW there were 3 others killed:

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton identified a second victim as Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information management officer who was a ten-year veteran of the State Department, a husband and a father of two.
The two other victims have not been named.

Bastards
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

These Muslim extremists are true barbarians. Someone they don't know posts something on youtube they don't like, and the response is to massacre the next Americans they see. Forget the fact that these Americans had nothing to do with the video.

JohnR, sometimes, in my weak moments, I think we should launch a few missles and turn that desert into glass.

Absolutely agree. I fear the world is heading down a scary path where the Arab Street gains Democracy. These people make Trailer Trash look like MIT postgrads

Nuke em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure... Yes, in weak moments it is the easy path. But we are supposed to be better than that and reality kicks in. Now, should nuke's fall into the sure and steady hands of the Arab Street...

Off topic, but I also thought it was interesting to hear Obama say "
the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others..."

Really? Then why do liberals say that Catholics are waging war on women, simply because the church doesn't want to be forced to provide that which it teaches is immoral? Isn't that denigrating the religious beliefs of others?

Jim - I agree with you probably more than I disagree but can we not have all of these threads devolve to X -v- Liberals

If they didn't have oil, they would have nothing

Absolutely agree. I fear the world is heading down a scary path where the Arab Street gains Democracy. These people make Trailer Trash look like MIT postgrads

Nuke em from orbit, it's the only way to be sure... Yes, in weak moments it is the easy path. But we are supposed to be better than that and reality kicks in. Now, should nuke's fall into the sure and steady hands of the Arab Street...



Jim - I agree with you probably more than I disagree but can we not have all of these threads devolve to X -v- Liberals

John, I am trying to tone it down. I thought I was stating facts without a lot of commentary.

John, I am trying to tone it down. I thought I was stating facts without a lot of commentary.

Maybe I'm slow to notice the change :rotf2:

Maybe I'm slow to notice the change :rotf2:

My hope is that you notice soon...

I'm surprised that in certain parts of the world (THAT part of the world), state department officials don't have secret service-quality protection. That's what they deserve...

Maybe the 2 others were secret service style body guards?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Maybe the 2 others were secret service style body guards?
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

3 others and I'm thinking marines maybe
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I'm so glad we "extended our hand" to these barbarians. Too bad they didn't "unclench their fists".

I think we should turn that desert into glass.

Off topic, but ............................................

*Something a handful of scientists haven't quite wrapped their collective heads around
is the discovery of sand fused into glass
by a nuclear explosion from our distant past....

Apparently this isn't our first rodeo.... :uhuh:

Wouldn't it just take the cake if this were a clandestine case of "Wag the Dog", in an attempt to bolster low/bad poll numbers?

You can't tell me that it couldn't be possible, since similar claims were made against Bush (war for oil?).

When the "experts" make claims that the attacks were too coincidental to just be random attacks, and they weren't all-out, "balls to the walls" attacks using conventtional weapons, it makes you wonder what was the purpose of the attacks?

Just food for thought....

*Something a handful of scientists haven't quite wrapped their collective heads around
is the discovery of sand fused into glass
by a nuclear explosion from our distant past....

Apparently this isn't our first rodeo.... :uhuh:

Or of course, it could just be from an impact event, not some theory of ancient aliens.....

One of the dead was a former Navy SEAL, raised in Winchester, with family now in Woburn. RIP warrior, and prayers for the family.

All these people know is war, they've fought among the tribes for centuries.
It's no different now, just at a global level.

Not sure what precipitated the Bengazi incident, other an isolated tribalism.

I'd like to recommend a campaign stop for Barak and Joe since they don't have an hour to meet with the Netanyahu
Seriously - you'd want to send our President into an area where Americans who were bravely serving our country were just killed?


Wouldn't it just take the cake if this were a clandestine case of "Wag the Dog", in an attempt to bolster low/bad poll numbers?



I agree - the Christian Right had to know that this would inflame tensions in the Muslim world and w/Romney's low poll numbers maybe they thought some dead Americans would help Romney's poll numbers - sad to have that type of thinking.

I agree - the Christian Right had to know that this would inflame tensions in the Muslim world and w/Romney's low poll numbers maybe they thought some dead Americans would help Romney's poll numbers - sad to have that type of thinking.

What did the Christian Right have to do with this to get dragged in to the conversation?

BTW - Got the Cuttyhunk Flask open :rotf2:

Seriously - you'd want to send our President into an area where Americans who were bravely serving our country were just killed?


Not really, would put not only him but also a lot of brave patriots who are protecting him in danger...

What did the Christian Right have to do with this to get dragged in to the conversation?

I'm going to generalize in all my posts today.:)

From what I heard the nutjob who produced the video was a Coptic Christian (which means some of their churches will prob. be burned down in Egypt soon) who was associated w/that whack job Terry Jones (I believe that was his name). He is the one who had a day to burn the Koran about a year about?

BTW - Got the Cuttyhunk Flask open :rotf2:

Fill it w/whiskey for the Boy Scout trips:)

This is a section of an article posted by a facebook friend. Kind of interesting in light of the recent Libya tragedy....shows that everything isn't as black and white as it sometimes appears. Tyler Stark was a navigator in an F15 shot down over Libya; he was also a survivor of Colombine. Please no arguments...I'm trying to turn over a new leaf. ;-)

" The soldiers from the Libyan rebel militia who found Tyler Stark weren’t entirely sure what to make of him, as he didn’t speak Arabic and they didn’t speak anything else. At any rate, he didn’t seem inclined to talk. The Libyans were now of course aware that someone was dropping bombs on Qad#^&da#^&fi’s troops, but they were a little unclear about who exactly was doing it. After taking a good long look at this pilot who had fallen from the sky they decided he must be French. And so when Bubaker Habib, who owned an English-language school in Tripoli, and was then hunkered down with fellow dissidents in a hotel in Ben#^&gha#^&zi, received the phone call from a friend of his in the rebel army, the friend asked him if he spoke French. “He tells me there is a French pilot,” says Bubaker. “He’s crashed. Because I spent 2003 in France, I still have some French words. So I said yes.”

The friend asked if Bubaker would mind driving the 30 kilometers or so out of Ben#^&gha#^&zi to talk to the “French pilot,” so they could figure out the best way to help him. Even though it was the middle of the night, and you could hear bombs exploding and guns firing, Bubaker jumped in his car. “I found Stark sitting there, holding his knee,” says Bubaker. “He was, to be honest with you, frantic. He doesn’t know what is going on. He was surrounded by the militia. He doesn’t know if they are friends or enemies.”

“Bonjour,” said Bubaker, or maybe not—he has forgotten the first thing out of his mouth. But in response Tyler Stark said something and Bubaker instantly recognized the accent. “Are you American?” asked Bubaker. Stark said he was. Bubaker leaned over and told him that he actually had friends in the U.S. Embassy who had fled in the early days of the war, and that if Stark would come with him back to Ben#^&gha#^&zi he could put them in touch. “He looked at me, astonished,” remembers Bubaker.

On the drive to Benghazi, Bubaker sensed that Stark was both shocked and wary. At any rate, as much as Bubaker might have wanted to know more about why America was dropping bombs on Libya, Stark would not tell him. And so Bubaker put on some 80s music and changed the subject to something other than war. The first song that came on was Diana Ross and Lionel Richie singing “Endless Love.” “You know what,” said Bubaker. “This song reminds me of my second marriage.” They talked the rest of the way, says Bubaker, “and we didn’t mention anything of any military action.” He drove the “American pilot” back to the hotel and instructed the militia to surround the place. Even in Libya they understood the fickle nature of American public opinion. “I told them, ‘We have an American pilot here. If he gets caught or killed it’s the end of the mission. Make sure he is safe and sound.’” Bubaker then called his friend, the former staffer in the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli, now removed to Washington, D.C.

It took a few hours for someone to come and fetch Stark. As he waited with Bubaker inside the hotel, word spread of this French pilot who had saved their lives. When they’d arrived at the hotel a man had handed Tyler Stark a rose, which the American found both strange and touching. Now women from across the city came with flowers to the front of the hotel. When Stark entered a room full of people they stood up and gave him a round of applause. “I’m not sure what I was expecting in Libya,” he says, “but I was not expecting a round of applause.”

Fill it w/whiskey for the Boy Scout trips:)

Paul, first of all, a movie that diaparages a religion is not justifiable reason to commit acts of terrorism.

Second, latest reports suggest that the Libyan attack was a planned operation, and had absolutely nothing to do with the youtube video.

Paul, first of all, a movie that diaparages a religion is not justifiable reason to commit acts of terrorism.

Second, latest reports suggest that the Libyan attack was a planned operation, and had absolutely nothing to do with the youtube video.

And it also appears it was likely not an organic thing from the general population of Libya

I agree - the Christian Right had to know that this would inflame tensions in the Muslim world and w/Romney's low poll numbers maybe they thought some dead Americans would help Romney's poll numbers - sad to have that type of thinking.

Wow how is the Kool Aid
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

So this is how Obama protects American lives, he only attends %50 of daily
intelligent meetings. Instead he reads the briefs, with the last meeting he attended
leading upto 9/11 was 9/5.
Oh that's right, I forgot how intelligent he is. Guess he forgot that truly intelligent
people realize how much they don't know and depend on others to interact with,
to question and learn more from.

Not KFC :fury:

Embassies stormed, KFC torched as anger over anti-Islam film rages

U.S. and other Western interests were targeted by angry crowds across much of the Muslim world on Friday, as rage spread over an anti-Islamic video produced in California.

The only reason various parts of the world tolerate the US is the many the BILLIONS & BILLIONS of $$$$$ the US "donates" every year to those countries. Let's start withholding those $$ for use at home or truly friendly allies.

Wow how is the Kool Aid
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Did you even read the post I quoted?

And it also appears it was likely not an organic thing from the general population of Libya

What's your point?

I concede that not every single citizen of Libya wants to kill Americans. Not every single Muslim wants to kill Americans. But there are, what, 2 billion Muslims in the world, so if 1% are sympathetic to the cause of jihadists, that's 20 million jihadists. The fact that there are peaceful Muslims out there, doesn't make me feel better. In fact, it makes me feel worse, because if every single Muslim was a jihadist, then the problem would be very easy to solve...reduce the nuclear aresnal by a few warheads...

The only reason various parts of the world tolerate the US is the many the BILLIONS & BILLIONS of $$$$$ the US "donates" every year to those countries. Let's start withholding those $$ for use at home or truly friendly allies.

Much of the funding is for FMF and FMS programs (Foreign Military Funding and Foreign Military Spending). These are US taxpayer dollars given to mostly Israel and Egypt. This money must be spent back in the US and is mostly for military/communications gear. I think these "investments" attempt to keep the Arabs and Jews from killing one another and to a lesser degree, provide us a "listening post" in various regions of the middle east. For example, Iraq and Afghanistan...guess who's in the middle? Our buddy...Mahmoud Imanutjob. The unfortunate part is sometimes these "investments" don't pan out so well....

Seriously - you'd want to send our President into an area where Americans who were bravely serving our country were just killed?




I agree - the Christian Right had to know that this would inflame tensions in the Muslim world and w/Romney's low poll numbers maybe they thought some dead Americans would help Romney's poll numbers - sad to have that type of thinking.


Sorry, I must have failed to make it clear: I was talking about Obama!

Sorry, I must have failed to make it clear: I was talking about Obama!

That was clear, all except the part about the low poll numbers. They may not be through the roof, but they are the higher of the two candidates as of this point.

That was clear, all except the part about the low poll numbers. They may not be through the roof, but they are the higher of the two candidates as of this point.

Not according to Rasmussen, whose poll was the most accurate in the 2008 election. Today, Rasmussen has Romney up 48-45.

It saddens me that Obama is polling above 10%. Add $5 trillion to the debt, and he has higher unemployment to show for it. How much more of a failure can one be on the economy?

But Zimmy is right, most polls have Obama ahead. However, from what I have seen, if you read the fine print in most of those polls, they sample more Democrats than Republicans.

One of the dead was a former Navy SEAL, raised in Winchester, with family now in Woburn. RIP warrior, and prayers for the family.

I was aftaid of this, but needed to confirm... It was the son of a fraternity brother. He was also the sniper in the rescue of the Maersk Alabama captain off Somalia. Keep the Doherty family in your thoughts.

Romney accuses Obama of 'mixed messages' following Libya attacks - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-libya-attack-obama20120912,0,6220306.story)

This is pathetic.

-spence

Romney accuses Obama of 'mixed messages' following Libya attacks - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-libya-attack-obama20120912,0,6220306.story)

This is pathetic.

-spence

Well he certainly has the spotlight now

Romney accuses Obama of 'mixed messages' following Libya attacks - latimes.com (http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-pn-romney-libya-attack-obama20120912,0,6220306.story)

This is pathetic.

-spence

Spence, Obama clearly sympathized with those offended by an insignificant video on youtube...(as an aside, Obama takes a million bucks from Bill Maher, who offends Catholics every day, so Obama is apparently on board with Catholic-bashing, but not Muslim-bashing). Many Americans don't feel that an insulting video is just cause for mass murder, and we don't like our President implying that there are 2 sides to this story. Because there aren't.

The administration is bumbling through this. Obama specifically says Egypt is not an ally, his State Departmenmt contradicts this.

Obama's response to this has not exactly been inspirational. Romney is free to criticize him for that, just as then-candidate Obama bashed Bush for mis-handling Iraq.

just as then-candidate Obama bashed Bush for mis-handling Iraq.


and everything else under the sun:uhuh:

'mixed messages' is an understatement :)

and everything else under the sun:uhuh:

'mixed messages' is an understatement :)

You're darn right it's an understatement. And the entire media is criticizing Romney for having the hutzpah to be critical of the Messiah. As if candidate Obama never said anything negative about Bush or Hilary or McCain.

Their hypocrisy knows no bounds, and they literally have no shame.

Spence, Obama clearly sympathized with those offended by an insignificant video on youtube...
Jim, this is the fundamental problem with your thinking.

It didn't happen.

During the day on Tuesday the embassy in Cairo independently put out a statement condemning the video before any violence began.

That night, Romney issues an embargoed statement (to be released after the 9/11 truce ironically enough) attacking the administration with "It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks,".

Before the Romeny's backwards statement was even issued to the press, the Whitehouse had already disavowed the embassy comment. The attack on Obama by Romney and the GOP is either grossly inept or worse an intentional manipulation of an event where Americans serving their country have died.

And on 9/11 of all days :fury:

How you can't see that as anything but shameful is beyond me.

-spence

I was aftaid of this, but needed to confirm... It was the son of a fraternity brother. He was also the sniper in the rescue of the Maersk Alabama captain off Somalia. Keep the Doherty family in your thoughts.

I'm so sorry. We worked with SEALs a few times, you have to see those guys in person to appreciate how good they are. They are world-class warriors. I promise you he has been rewarded with a very special spot in what is a very special place. May God's love help the family through this time.

Jim, this is the fundamental problem with your thinking.

It didn't happen.

During the day on Tuesday the embassy in Cairo independently put out a statement condemning the video before any violence began.

That night, Romney issues an embargoed statement (to be released after the 9/11 truce ironically enough) attacking the administration with "It's disgraceful that the Obama Administration's first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks,".

Before the Romeny's backwards statement was even issued to the press, the Whitehouse had already disavowed the embassy comment. Obama by RomneyThe attack on and the GOP is either grossly inept or worse an intentional manipulation of an event where Americans serving their country have died.

And on 9/11 of all days :fury:

How you can't see that as anything but shameful is beyond me.

-spence

"It didn't happen."

Sure it did. I saw a stament that both expressed sympathy for the hurt feelings caused by the video, and also said that wasn't justification for the attack.

Spence, even if the attack never happened, Obama shouldn't be commenting on that video. If Obama doesn't like the anti-Islamic views in that video, why does he pal around with libs who say hateful things about Christianity? Like saying we've declared war on women?

"The attack on Obama by Romney"

I see. When Obama criticizes someone, that's OK. When we criticize him, it's an attack, is that right?

I don't want to keep you from your Kool Aid stand anymore.

Politics disgusts me lately.. All sides disgust me. Both parties would rather point fingers at eachother and kick the issues that need to be fixed down the road to the next guy and then blame everyone else for our problems. Just the notion that this event is being used to prove political points is disgusting.

Sure it did. I saw a stament that both expressed sympathy for the hurt feelings caused by the video, and also said that wasn't justification for the attack.

Please show me where Obama expresses sympathy for those hurt by the video. If you saw it it should be easy to find.

Spence, even if the attack never happened, Obama shouldn't be commenting on that video. If Obama doesn't like the anti-Islamic views in that video, why does he pal around with libs who say hateful things about Christianity? Like saying we've declared war on women?

Please provide a link where Obama is commenting on the video.

I see. When Obama criticizes someone, that's OK. When we criticize him, it's an attack, is that right?
No, I'm saying that your criticism is based on a flawed understanding of the facts.

You do like facts right?

-spence

Btw the man who made the video was detained and questioned by police.Why?When did the right to free speech require detention and questioning?

Also Obama called the man reckless and irresponsible and such behaviour should be monitored and curtailed.He really did.

Btw the man who made the video was detained and questioned by police.Why?When did the right to free speech require detention and questioning?
Because he's on probation after pleading no contest to federal identity theft charges. There appears to be a chance he's violated his parole.

Also Obama called the man reckless and irresponsible and such behaviour should be monitored and curtailed.He really did.

Again, I'd like to see exactly what he said.

-spence

So this is how Obama protects American lives, he only attends %50 of daily intelligent meetings. Instead he reads the briefs, with the last meeting he attended leading upto 9/11 was 9/5.
Oh that's right, I forgot how intelligent he is. Guess he forgot that truly intelligent people realize how much they don't know and depend on others to interact with, to question and learn more from.
It's posts like this that really illustrate how bad a read people have on Obama.

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor:

The President is among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet. He receives and reads his [Presidential Daily Brief] every day, and most days when he’s at the White House receives a briefing in person. When necessary he probes the arguments, requests more information or seeks alternate analysis. Sometimes that’s via a written assessment and other times it’s in person. {…}

Marc basically wrote a story culled from our public schedule that shows how Marc’s old boss, President Bush, structured his day differently than President Obama. Not exactly breaking news to anyone who has covered this place for the last few years.

Not according to Rasmussen, whose poll was the most accurate in the 2008 election. Today, Rasmussen has Romney up 48-45.

It saddens me that Obama is polling above 10%. Add $5 trillion to the debt, and he has higher unemployment to show for it. How much more of a failure can one be on the economy?

But Zimmy is right, most polls have Obama ahead. However, from what I have seen, if you read the fine print in most of those polls, they sample more Democrats than Republicans.

Jim, you know it is the electoral college that matters. Polls don't mean much at this point. However, you are right about the accuracy of rasmussen and it's polls put Obama at about 310 electoral votes;safely 246, plus in the toss ups he is up in Ohio, Florida, Va, and tied in CO. He's not the one worried by the polls, as was implied in an earlier post.

I was aftaid of this, but needed to confirm... It was the son of a fraternity brother. He was also the sniper in the rescue of the Maersk Alabama captain off Somalia. Keep the Doherty family in your thoughts.

I also read somewhere that he was involved in the rescue of Jessica Lynch as well

Please show me where Obama expresses sympathy for those hurt by the video. If you saw it it should be easy to find.



Please provide a link where Obama is commenting on the video.


No, I'm saying that your criticism is based on a flawed understanding of the facts.

You do like facts right?

-spence

"You do like facts right?"

I do. Interesting that you, who deny that Michelle Obama said she wasn't proud of the US until Barack got the nomination, are now consumed with what's fact and what is not. Interesting.

"Please provide a link where Obama is commenting on the video."

Obama vows to 'bring justice' to killers in US Embassy attack in Libya | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/09/12/us-ambassador-to-libya-and-3-embassy-staff-members-reportedly-killed-in-libya/)

"While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants," Obama said.

Good enough? There is Obama commenting on the video. OK? Satisfied?

I responded to your question directly. Perhaps you can respond to one of mine, and here it is...

If Obama is sincere in that he "rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others", why does Obama's PAC (run by Obama pal Bill Burton) take $1 million from Bill Maher, who bashes Christianity every night? Why does Obama surround himself with staffers and friends in the media who relentlessly bash Catholics? Why did the Democratic convention feature one fanatical feminist after another who lied about some war on women? That was clearly a direct response to the Catholic Church's request that they not have to abandon deeply held religious beliefs, for the sake of a liberal pet project. Isn't that a wee bit hypocritical, Spence?

Spence, when you deal with me, you would do well to keep in mind that everyhting I believe is based on facts and common sense. Unlike you, I'm not blindly devoted to one side.

It didn't happen.

During the day on Tuesday(9-11) the embassy in Cairo independently put out a statement condemning the video before any violence began.

-spence

this is comical....I guess the buck stops over there :uhuh:

let's see

unaffiliated "independent" mystery embassy statement-

“[B]The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” So declared the Obama State Department in a statement issued on the website of its Egyptian embassy

Obama statement-

"While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants," Obama said.

this seems a bit backward to me, Obama has, and many of his most ardent supporters routinely denigrate the religious beliefs of others, it's practically a sport with many on the "intellectual left"....I don't recall any opposition or apologies.....

the second part of the statement is what should have been first.... senselessly murdering someone or burning buildings because someone on the other side of the planet offended your sensibilities would seem to be the logical object of your scorn...wouldn't it? I don't think the first and the second deserve equal treatment...not even close

this is comical....I guess the buck stops over there :uhuh:

let's see

unaffiliated "independent" mystery embassy statement-

“[B]The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” So declared the Obama State Department in a statement issued on the website of its Egyptian embassy

Obama statement-

"While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants," Obama said.

this seems a bit backward to me, Obama has, and many of his most ardent supporters routinely denigrate the religious beliefs of others, it's practically a sport with many on the "intellectual left"....I don't recall any opposition or apologies.....

the second part of the statement is what should have been first.... senselessly murdering someone or burning buildings because someone on the other side of the planet offended your sensibilities would seem to be the logical object of your scorn...wouldn't it? I don't think the first and the second deserve equal treatment...not even close

Damn right.

(1) I have never heard Obama chastise his fellow liberals for bashing Christianity. These people hate Catholics, and they make no secret about it. But since Catholics have not been anointed with "victim" status by liberals, it is therefore acceptable to attack Catholics at every available moment. SInce Muslims have been anointed with "victim" status by the left, they are a protected species.

(2) as for Obama's statement...the only reference to the youtube video should have been a statement that Muslims, like everyone else, need to accept the unfortunate reality that there are jerks out there, and even jerks have the right to free speech.

I cannot wait to hear Spence's "response" to this...

and it doesn't appear as though the initial "independent" statement nor the reworded statement were very effective :)

I do. Interesting that you, who deny that Michelle Obama said she wasn't proud of the US until Barack got the nomination, are now consumed with what's fact and what is not. Interesting.
It's called critical thought, they teach it in grade school.

"While the United States rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, we must all unequivocally oppose the kind of senseless violence that took the lives of these public servants," Obama said.

Good enough? There is Obama commenting on the video. OK? Satisfied?
He's not talking directly about the video here, he's talking in general terms about the senseless denigration of religion and violence. It's an indirect comment at best, prompted by the video but not direct judgement.

If Obama is sincere in that he "rejects efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others", why does Obama's PAC (run by Obama pal Bill Burton) take $1 million from Bill Maher, who bashes Christianity every night? Why does Obama surround himself with staffers and friends in the media who relentlessly bash Catholics?
Maher is critical of all organized religions. His ire for Catholics is largely fueled by an organized tolerance of pedophilia. He's plenty harsh on fundamentalist Islam as well.

It would be intellectually dishonest to claim parity with the "Innocence of Muslims" move that started all this. It was intended only to insult, denigrate and provoke a negative response. From what I understand there isn't a single constructive element to it and even the actors were misled as to it's purpose.

Why did the Democratic convention feature one fanatical feminist after another who lied about some war on women? That was clearly a direct response to the Catholic Church's request that they not have to abandon deeply held religious beliefs, for the sake of a liberal pet project. Isn't that a wee bit hypocritical, Spence?

Perhaps because you're so consumed with hate you don't see things clearly. You see a "liberal pet project" while others see preventative care to improve women's health.

-spence

this is comical....I guess the buck stops over there :uhuh:

let's see

unaffiliated "independent" mystery embassy statement-

“[B]The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions.” So declared the Obama State Department in a statement issued on the website of its Egyptian embassy
I'm not aware of any issuance by the State Department using the words "feelings of Muslims".

What you have is a right wing media trying to manipulate an unfortunate situation through confusion for political gain. I'm not sure what's worse, those who knowingly manipulate or those who see it and knowingly pass it along.

Sad.

-spence

I'm not aware of any issuance by the State Department using the words "feelings of Muslims".

What you have is a right wing media trying to manipulate an unfortunate situation through confusion for political gain. I'm not sure what's worse, those who knowingly manipulate or those who see it and knowingly pass it along.

Sad.

-spence

Cairo protesters scale U.S. Embassy wall, remove flag (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/09/11/cairo-us-embassy-protesters-prophet-mohammad/70000126/1)


After the protest, the U.S. Embassy issued this statement on its website:

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims â?? as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of other

Cairo protesters scale U.S. Embassy wall, remove flag (http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2012/09/11/cairo-us-embassy-protesters-prophet-mohammad/70000126/1)


After the protest, the U.S. Embassy issued this statement on its website:

The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims â?? as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions. Today, the 11th anniversary of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the United States, Americans are honoring our patriots and those who serve our nation as the fitting response to the enemies of democracy. Respect for religious beliefs is a cornerstone of American democracy. We firmly reject the actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the religious beliefs of other

It's a matter of record that the statement was put out 6 hours before the attack by embassy staff alone. I've never read that it was reissued and would suspect the article you quote is in error as it is four days old.

The first actual Administration response by the State Department came later by Clinton:

“I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today,” Clinton said, confirming the death of a consulate diplomat. “Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.”

I'm sure you'll be happy to see she has the elements in the right sequence.

-spence

Damn right.

(1) I have never heard Obama chastise his fellow liberals for bashing Christianity. These people hate Catholics, and they make no secret about it.

See you see hatred in things like the health services bill. I see a policy that doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs by taking advantage of contraceptives (which largely should reduce unwanted pregnancies, and the potential number of abortions, no?), but lets those who may work in a Catholic hospital/school who may not have the same fervent belief's in the churches stance on contraceptives.

It's called critical thought, they teach it in grade school.


He's not talking directly about the video here, he's talking in general terms about the senseless denigration of religion and violence. It's an indirect comment at best, prompted by the video but not direct judgement.


Maher is critical of all organized religions. His ire for Catholics is largely fueled by an organized tolerance of pedophilia. He's plenty harsh on fundamentalist Islam as well.

It would be intellectually dishonest to claim parity with the "Innocence of Muslims" move that started all this. It was intended only to insult, denigrate and provoke a negative response. From what I understand there isn't a single constructive element to it and even the actors were misled as to it's purpose.


Perhaps because you're so consumed with hate you don't see things clearly. You see a "liberal pet project" while others see preventative care to improve women's health.

-spence

"It's called critical thought, they teach it in grade school."

Spence, you denied something that irrefitably happened (Michelle Obama's statement). Denying that something happened, when it clearly did happen, is not 'critical thought'. I don;t know what it is exactly (ask a psychiatrist about that), but it's not 'critical thought'. I don't think they taught you in grade school to deny facts which don't serve your agenda.

"He's not talking directly about the video here, he's talking in general terms about the senseless denigration of religion and violence"

Seriously? That's your response? How could you possibly know that? How could you know what was in his mind?

Obama's statement came out the day the ambassador was killed, and at the time they were saying that the ambassador was killed because of the video. So it stands to reason that if Obama is connecting violence to religion-bashing, that's what he was talking about. Nice try.

"you're so consumed with hate "

I'm not consumed with hate. I just don't like it when people deny irrefutable facts to protect Obama. You do it all the time. I'm trying to keep it honest. because I repeatedly call out your 'critical thought', you dismiss it as hate.

See you see hatred in things like the health services bill. I see a policy that doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs by taking advantage of contraceptives (which largely should reduce unwanted pregnancies, and the potential number of abortions, no?), but lets those who may work in a Catholic hospital/school who may not have the same fervent belief's in the churches stance on contraceptives.

"See you see hatred in things like the health services bill. "

No, the bill isn't hate...it's religious intolerance. The reaction to the Catholic Church's stance on the bill was what was hateful.

RIROCKHOUND, can you honestly say that, after the Catholic Church resisted paying for contraception, that liberals weren't bashing Catholicism? All this nonsense about a war on women? That's not hate-mongering and fear-mongering?

ROCKHOUND, liberals constantly refer to the 'war on women'. either (1) you believe that there is literally a war on women, or (2) liberals are misleading the public to cast Catholics in a negative light.

Which is it? You tell me, which is it?

As to the bill, you are wrong. The Catholic Church believes contraception is immoral. "Separation of church and state" has been interpreted to mean that the federal government not appear to either endorse nor reject the beliefs of any religion. Telling the Catholic Church thatthey must provide what they teach is immoral, can easily be construed as a rejection of Catholic cathechism. We;ll see how it plays out in court.

as to your over-simplified suggestion that increased availability of contraception will reduce abortions and unwanted pregnancies? That sounds very logical...but the facts don't support it. During the sexual revolution of the 1960's, those in favor of contraception availability used that same argument...that if birth control was available everywhere, we'd have fewer abortions and unwanted pregnancies. And what happened, was the exact opposite. we now have more abortions and unwanted pregnanices. Many sociologists say it's because liberals have created a public perception that sex is a casual thing. I don't know what caused it. All I know is that after contraception became widely available, we see more abortions, more infidelity, more STD's, more kids born out of wedlock. Not less, but more. Way more. Way, way more.

Try making that wrong.

That's liberalism, ROCKHOUND. Something that sounds like common sense, and makes a great bumper sticker, but blows up in your face when you implement it. What I will never understand (maybe you can explain it), is why folks continue to say things like "widespread availability of contraception results in fewer abortions", when we have 30 years of data tells us it just ain't so.

FYI - getting close to locking this thread down

See you see hatred in things like the health services bill. I see a policy that doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs by taking advantage of contraceptives (which largely should reduce unwanted pregnancies, and the potential number of abortions, no?), but lets those who may work in a Catholic hospital/school who may not have the same fervent belief's in the churches stance on contraceptives.

This business of the federal government demanding that a third party pay for contraceptives befuddles me. If buying something as cheap as contraceptives should be povided for all women, not just very poor ones who government could provide with all the other stuff they get, then what else should not be provided by third parties? If contraceptives should be provided by insurance then cars and houses and clothing and college education . . . and . . . and . . . etc., which are much more expensive, should be provided by some form of insurance other than the insurance you provide for yourself by earning the money to buy them.

And tying contraception to health care is also befuddling. Every thing you do or buy can be tied to health care as much or more. The primary purpose of contraCEPTIVES is to prevent pregnancy. So, is pregnancy to be considered a disease? Some forms of contraception, condoms, can also prevent venereal diseases, but their main function was to prevent pregnancey, and they are cheap.

The primary purpose of contraCEPTIVES is to prevent pregnancy. So, is pregnancy to be considered a disease? Some forms of contraception, condoms, can also prevent venereal diseases, but their main function was to prevent pregnancey, and they are cheap.
Contraceptives cover a range of products many of which have valid medicinal uses outside of prevention of pregnancy. This was one of the core arguments for their coverage.

-spence

FYI - getting close to locking this thread down

Great...how long can they beat a dead horse...:rotf2:

Spence, you denied something that irrefitably happened (Michelle Obama's statement). Denying that something happened, when it clearly did happen, is not 'critical thought'. I don;t know what it is exactly (ask a psychiatrist about that), but it's not 'critical thought'. I don't think they taught you in grade school to deny facts which don't serve your agenda.
The fact that she said some words is meaningless without an understanding of context. I bias my context by what she said around those words, you bias it through your preconceived idea of what you think she represents...

Seriously? That's your response? How could you possibly know that? How could you know what was in his mind?
One would think he would have mentioned the film specifically.

Obama's statement came out the day the ambassador was killed, and at the time they were saying that the ambassador was killed because of the video. So it stands to reason that if Obama is connecting violence to religion-bashing, that's what he was talking about. Nice try.
I said it was indirect. Bush did the exact same thing you know, to make a general statements around tolerance and violence when that Danish cartoon ruckus lit up.

I'm not consumed with hate. I just don't like it when people deny irrefutable facts to protect Obama. You do it all the time. I'm trying to keep it honest. because I repeatedly call out your 'critical thought', you dismiss it as hate.

You're not really basing an argument on facts from what I can see.

It's not a fact that Michelle Obama didn't feel proud of her country until 2008, it's not a fact that Obama responded to the movie by sympathizing with rioters and it's not a fact that Obama hates the Catholic church.

-spence

Great...how long can they beat a dead horse...:rotf2:

I'm just trying to provide clarity to a confusing situation. People should be grateful I'm not charging my usual fee :pats:

-spence

. So, is pregnancy to be considered a disease?

yes, a disease, and also according to our president it can be a punishment, it can also be unwanted which may be slightly different than unplanned but won't likely end well for either the unwanted or unplanned and which sort of flies in the face of the whole "it's for the children", "I'm my brother's keeper" and "caring for the least among us" routine :) I guess you only count if you are lucky enough to be planned and wanted and can collect some kind of government benefit :uhuh:

I'm just trying to provide clarity to a confusing situation. People should be grateful I'm not charging my usual fee :pats:

-spence

you constantly move the goal posts(little Pats reference) and flip reality on it's head...that's not clarity..it's sophistry :uhuh:

you constantly move the goal posts(little Pats reference) and flip reality on it's head...that's not clarity..it's sophistry :uhuh:
I'll take that as a compliment, but please be more specific.

-spence

I'll take that as a compliment, but please be more specific.

-spence

A sophism is taken as a specious argument used for deception. It might be crafted to appear logical while actually representing a falsehood, or it might use obscure words and complicated sentence constructions in order to intimidate the opponent into agreement out of fear of feeling foolish. Other techniques include manipulating the opponent's prejudices and emotions to overcome their logical faculties.

I think we refer to it as "Spencism" around here :uhuh::)

you should take it as a compliment...you are world class in this arena.....

I'm certainly aware of what a sophism is, what I was asking for were examples in this thread where you believe it is evident.

-spence

The fact that she said some words is meaningless without an understanding of context. I bias my context by what she said around those words, you bias it through your preconceived idea of what you think she represents...


One would think he would have mentioned the film specifically.


I said it was indirect. Bush did the exact same thing you know, to make a general statements around tolerance and violence when that Danish cartoon ruckus lit up.



You're not really basing an argument on facts from what I can see.

It's not a fact that Michelle Obama didn't feel proud of her country until 2008, it's not a fact that Obama responded to the movie by sympathizing with rioters and it's not a fact that Obama hates the Catholic church.

-spence

"The fact that she said some words is meaningless without an understanding of context"

Before you started talking about 'context', you denied she said it.



"One would think he would have mentioned the film specifically"

One would think he would do a lot of things differently. The man made a career by voting 'present' in IL, now you're curious as to why he wasn't being specific...

"Bush did the exact same thing you know..."

Spence, you have now played every desperate card that exists. You denied that there was a statement about Islam and the violence. We showed you there was. You denied the state department said anything about 'hurt feelings', we showed you that you were wrong again. With your back against the wall, and no honest way to escape, you dredge up Bush.

Spence, I promise that it won't kill you to admit that you were wrong on the facts here. Almost everyhting you have said has been demonstrably false.

It's posts like this that really illustrate how bad a read people have on Obama.

National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor:

Sorry Spence, but I believe the investagative reporter who obtained his
information from the White House last week showing Obama has only attended %50
of the daily intelligence meetings and his last attended meeting was on 9/5 before 9/11.

How can you say he is putting the safety of the American people first when he READS the briefs %50 of the time?
Rediculous, he should be at every meeting and have probing questions in that meeting everyday.
Symantics or whatever, we are at war.

The time close to the 9/11 anniversary and right up to it has to be a time for extra vigliance yet he was not in attendance asking questions and staying on top of the situations.
Say what you want about Bush,and there is plenty to say, but his first order of business for the day was to attend the intelligence briefing. Kept our citizens safe in the duration of his term. Can't say that about Obama now.

Spence, you have now played every desperate card that exists. You denied that there was a statement about Islam and the violence. We showed you there was. You denied the state department said anything about 'hurt feelings', we showed you that you were wrong again. With your back against the wall, and no honest way to escape, you dredge up Bush.

Spence, I promise that it won't kill you to admit that you were wrong on the facts here. Almost everyhting you have said has been demonstrably false.
Interesting...

You're missing pretty much everything I've posted. This post gives really good insight into how you process information.

-spence

I'm certainly aware of what a sophism is, what I was asking for were examples in this thread where you believe it is evident.

-spence

pick a post...it's what you practice, picking a specific post would be enabling, another opportunity for you to argue what the meaning of "is" is, move the goal post, argue, insult, ignore reality...you are "smart"...anyone that disagrees with you is dumb...see your last post....it's an odd game...Obama is brilliant and if you don't get that you just aren't smart enough to understand how really brilliant he really is...YIKES

"It's posts like this that really illustrate how bad a read people have on Obama."-SPENCE

we have a pretty good read on Obama Spence...he's an historic disaster and it's getting worse and he's none of what you continue to pretend he either is or isn't :uhuh:

For those who don't know, Kirsten Powers is a regular on Foxnews, MSNBC, and CNN. She is a commited liberal, but unlike most liberal newsies, she's thoughtful, articlualte, respectful, never throws any bombs. She loves Obama. Here's an interesting piece she wrote...

President Obama, stop blaming the victim for Mideast violence | Fox News (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/09/14/president-obama-stop-blaming-victim-for-mideast-violence/)

Sorry Spence, but I believe the investagative reporter who obtained his
information from the White House last week showing Obama has only attended %50
of the daily intelligence meetings and his last attended meeting was on 9/5 before 9/11.

How can you say he is putting the safety of the American people first when he READS the briefs %50 of the time?
No, the report doesn't say he reads the briefs 50% of the time, it says he only has them READ TO HIM 50% of the time.

You should read the Woodward book "Obama's Wars". It reveals that Obama is extremely engaged in the intelligence and security process, so much so that top military brass found the contrast with Bush to be noteworthy.

-spence

"It's posts like this that really illustrate how bad a read people have on Obama."-SPENCE
That wasn't sophistry.

The investigative report is clearly misleading, even Justplugit is coming to false conclusions.

-spence

No, the report doesn't say he reads the briefs 50% of the time, it says he only has them READ TO HIM 50% of the time.

You should read the Woodward book "Obama's Wars". It reveals that Obama is extremely engaged in the intelligence and security process, so much so that top military brass found the contrast with Bush to be noteworthy.

-spence

maybe he should have joined the military.... because in Woodward's new book, "The Price of Politics" he kicks the crap out of your war hero for his lack of presidential leadership....maybe he just likes blowing things up:uhuh:

"Over the course of almost 450 pages, Woodward depicts Obama as an arrogant, aloof and hyperpartisan president who manages to either alienate or disappoint everybody he needs to help govern Washington."

sounds about right :uhuh:

That wasn't sophistry.

The investigative report is clearly misleading, even Justplugit is coming to false conclusions.

-spence

atta boy....you are right, and have all the facts....everyone else is wrong or misleading or misled....makes the world a great place don't it?:)

Spence, point being as Commander in Chief, responslble for the safety
of America's Citizens, he is missing personal interaction with his Daily Intelligence
Meetings %50 of the the time, no matter how hard you try to explain it away.

Spence, point being as Commander in Chief, responslble for the safety
of America's Citizens, he is missing personal interaction with his Daily Intelligence
Meetings %50 of the the time, no matter how hard you try to explain it away.

Do we know what % of these briefings either Bush or Clinton went to?
Or is this just more rhetoric and hyperbole?

Spence, point being as Commander in Chief, responslble for the safety
of America's Citizens, he is missing personal interaction with his Daily Intelligence
Meetings %50 of the the time, no matter how hard you try to explain it away.

I can explain it...par for the course...pardon the pun:uhuh:

Obama Holds First Cabinet Meeting Since January
9:02 AM, Jul 26, 2012

According to President Barack Obama's official schedule, "Later in the afternoon, the President will hold a Cabinet Meeting in the Cabinet Room. There will be a pool spray at the top of the meeting."

By CBS reporter Mark Knoller's account, this cabinet meeting is the first one President Obama has held since January 31:
......................

President Obama's jobs panel missing in action
By JOSH GERSTEIN | 7/18/12 4:37 AM EDT

President Barack Obama’s Jobs Council hasn’t met publicly for six months, even as the issue of job creation dominates the 2012 election.

President Obama's jobs panel missing in action - Josh Gerstein - POLITICO.com (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0712/78637.html)


probably just really, really "extremely engaged in the intelligence and security process"

Do we know what % of these briefings either Bush or Clinton went to?
Or is this just more rhetoric and hyperbole?


Marc Thiessen: Why is Obama skipping more than half of his daily intelligence meetings? - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-is-obama-skipping-more-than-half-of-his-daily-intelligence-meetings/2012/09/10/6624afe8-fb49-11e1-b153-218509a954e1_story.html)

While the Bush records are not yet available electronically for analysis, officials tell me the former president held his intelligence meeting six days a week, no exceptions — usually with the vice president, the White House chief of staff, the national security adviser, the director of National Intelligence, or their deputies, and CIA briefers in attendance. Once a week, he held an expanded Homeland Security briefing that included the Homeland Security adviser, the FBI director and other homeland security officials. Bush also did more than 100 hour-long “deep dives” in which he invited intelligence analysts into the Oval Office to get their unvarnished and sometimes differing views. Such meetings deepened the president’s understanding of the issues and helped analysts better understand the problems with which he was wrestling.


at some point Spence and the other Obama defenders have to wake up from this fantasy that he's the smartest ever and anything that pokes holes in that big pink bubble is unfair, untrue, misleading or...something far worse(when all else fails)...

the results are a pretty good indicator...middle east is in chaos, don't know if you are paying attention to China and Japan but the groundwork is being laid for a major confrontation in the Asian Pacific, the Fed has undertaken QE3, dependence on government is at record levels and going up, you have to do a houdini every jobs report to try to claim any improvement, gas is at 4 bucks, funny that O came into office bashing Wall Street and basically the one thing that he can try to claim is doing much better under his watch is...WALL STREET:rotf2:

See you see hatred in things like the health services bill. I see a policy that doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs by taking advantage of contraceptives (which largely should reduce unwanted pregnancies, and the potential number of abortions, no?), but lets those who may work in a Catholic hospital/school who may not have the same fervent belief's in the churches stance on contraceptives.

Bryan....this is rhetoric and hyperbole :uhuh:

Bryan....this is rhetoric and hyperbole :uhuh:

Actually, that quote, I would say is my interpretation, vs. the way Jim interprets it.

Actually, that quote, I would say is my interpretation, vs. the way Jim interprets it.

Here's what you said...

"I see a policy that doesn't require members to violate their personal beliefs..."

OK, maybe it doesn't violate the beliefs of the individuals. But how can you say it doesn't violate the belief of the employer, for example the Catholic Church? Obama is telling the Cathlic Church that it must pay for, and provide, that which it teaches is immoral. Nothing could be a more obvious violation of Catholic Catechism than telling the Church it must provide contraception on demand, for the explicit purposes of recreational sex (the Church does provide contraception for legitimate medical need, but not for recreational sex)

[QUOTE=scottw;959179

the results are a pretty good indicator...middle east is in chaos, don't know if you are paying attention to China and Japan but the groundwork is being laid for a major confrontation in the Asian Pacific, the Fed has undertaken QE3, dependence on government is at record levels and going up, you have to do a houdini every jobs report to try to claim any improvement, gas is at 4 bucks, funny that O came into office bashing Wall Street and basically the one thing that he can try to claim is doing much better under his watch is...WALL STREET:rotf2:[/QUOTE]

That says it all. How this guy is polling north of 45%, with that track record, is beyond me. It's just incomprehensible.

For all, please google Fiscal Cliff
This stuff is real. This is non-partisan. This is very, very scary.

For all, please google Fiscal Cliff
This stuff is real. This is non-partisan. This is very, very scary.

You are a racist. You hate women.

The investigative report is clearly misleading, even Justplugit is coming to false conclusions.

-spence

Spence, after you were proven wrong by the Washinton Post Thissen Report,
I'm still waiting for your retraction about me coming to false conclusions. :hihi:
Bold print would be fine. :cheers: