• If you are having problems logging in please use the Contact Us in the lower right hand corner of the forum page for assistance.

Benghazi Bombshell

Help Support Ranchers.net:

For someone to say that Benghazi is not a big issue has his head in the sand.

Most all of the major networks showed the video of Jon Karl of ABC News grilling that liar Jay Carney yesterday.

OT is attempting to divert again but it won't work. We know the truth. The truth is not in him.
 
You hear folks talk of the economy, of the current local crime issues, cuss the President over XL pipeline, etc., etc.,-- but you never hear anyone bring up "look whats happening with the Benghazi investigation in a conversation...
Folks are used to Presidents screwing up overseas (and tired of it. They just think we should stay home).. And they are used to (R) and (D) "he said- she saids"... And they have watched LBJ, Nixon, Reagan, GHW, Clinton, GW, all get caught in lies and cover ups- mostly over foreign interventions.... Its no big deal anymore... And they don't want anymore of those witch hunt hearings.. (Remember Ollie North- and Reagan's lapse of memory- how many US citizens/agents died carrying out that illegally entered into Contra affair ?)
Like the article says- they just want us to get our nose out of these foreign interventions and stay out of them... Let Canada handle it.... :wink:

That's why I doubt very much you will see anything major come of the Benghazi deal... Repubs will keep trying to make it an issue- but nothing will happen over it- because folks are getting tired of that too...They're tired of the negative nitpicking and want to see our leaders (Congress and the President) do their job...

I saw an article the other day where the author theorized that since Congress has been dysfunctional for years and the President can't do anything because of them except by executive order-- you will see the SCOTUS taking a much more active role with more cases- and more legislating from the bench-- which neither party might like...
 
Faster horses said:
Oldtimer said:
Red Bull said:
Do we really expect to see anything done about this?

I doubt if you see anything done- because its not an issue with most folks.. Its not a coffee shop issue, a cold beer issue, a backroom bar b que issue... Most think the only thing wrong the President did was allow a diplomatic delegation to go into a country in the middle of a civil war- with no sound government to protect them... The majority agree that we shouldn't have sent in troops and invaded another sovereignty even after all hell broke lose... Most remember the lesson taught by stupidly invading the sovereign nation of Iraq...

This article echo's the changing attitude on foreign policy which is going more toward the Libertarian thinking of the US staying out of all the foreign conflicts and quit being the policemen of the world...
One of the surveys I saw a couple of weeks ago had over 60% following that attitude...

April 30th, 2014


Should U.S. butt out of international conflicts?


Posted by
CNN Political Editor Paul Steinhauser

Washington (CNN) - Stay out.

That seems to increasingly be the message from Americans when it comes to U.S. involvement in global hotspots, such as the crisis in Ukraine and the bloody civil war in Syria.




Forty-seven percent of people questioned in a new NBC News/Wall Street Journal national poll say the United States should be less active in foreign affairs, with 19% saying the country should be more active and three in ten saying the current level is just about right. That's a switch from September 2001, right after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, when 37% said the United States should be more active and 14% said the country should be less active in world affairs, with 44% saying the current level was appropriate.

Other recent surveys also indicated a desire by many Americans to stay out of overseas conflicts. Sixty-two percent of people questioned last week in a USA Today/Pew Research Center poll said they were opposed to Washington sending arms and military supplies to Ukraine's government, as it deals with pro-Russian separatists.

By a 54%-39% margin, voters in a Quinnipiac University poll conducted late last month said it was more important for the U.S. "not to get too involved" in the Ukraine crisis rather than "take a firm stand against Russian actions."

And 61% questioned in a CBS News survey from late March said the United States doesn't have a responsibility to do something about the situation between Russia and Ukraine, with only around three in ten saying that Washington had a responsibility to get involved.

"American attitudes have changed since the days after the 9/11 attacks when an interventionist mindset was the norm," said CNN Polling Director Keating Holland. "The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan took care of that, reminding Americans that military actions often have unforeseen consequences."

While the polls indicate many Americans want less U.S. involvement in international affairs, they also suggest that the public's not happy with how President Barack Obama's been handling global hotspots, including the crisis in Ukraine.

Less than four in ten in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal survey say they approve of how the President's handling foreign policy, an all-time low for Obama in that poll. And according to the ABC News/Washington Post survey released Tuesday, only 34% of the public approves of how the President's dealing with the conflict between Ukraine and Russia, down eight points from early March.

Opposition to the Iraq War was a central theme in then-presidential candidate Obama's successful campaign for the White House in the 2008 election. In his recent week-long trip to Asia, the President defended his current strategy in dealing with international conflicts.

"For some reason, many who were proponents of what I consider to be a disastrous decision to go into Iraq haven't really learned the lesson of the last decade and they just keep playing the same note over and over again. Why? I don't know but my job as commander-in-chief is to look at what is going to advance our security interests over the long term. To keep our military in reserve for when we absolutely need it. There are going to be times where there are disasters and difficulties and challenges around the world and not all of those are going to be immediately solvable by us," Obama said at a news conference on Monday in the Philippines.

Five takeaways from Obama's Philippines news conference

"That attitude mirrors a poll finding in late 2011, when more than seven in ten Americans said that American military force should only be used as a last resort, after economic and diplomatic efforts have failed," Holland notes. "The problem for Obama is that the public may be just as unhappy with the consequences of inaction as they would have been with any military action."

It might not be a backroom bar issue, but I know MANY people who care
about this country that are disgusted with the Obama Administration
in regards to the Benghazi cover-up in the fact the the terrorists that attacked are still out there.
Didn't Obama say they would be captured, that he wouldn't let this go?
What do you think has been done about that, OT?

Also the people on Facebook haven't let this go. There are a lot of 'Shares'
when anything about Benghazi comes up and it comes up regularly. There
are regular posts linking Hilary to Benghazi as well.

I dare say it is not an issue from Oldtimer's bar stool but if the polls are right it is from a lot of other people's stools as even 50% of DEMOCRATS believe Obama lied about the issue and I think we all (EXCEPT OLDTIMER) knows it was because he was campaigning on the idea AlQueade was on the run and it was his failed Foreign policies that lead to the preventable deaths of 4 Americans. The White House was in CYA mode and these newly released prove it. Kristen Powers was on Outnumbered today and she as a democrat doesn't believe anything Carney is saying during his press briefings about the emails and how they are supposedly about the protested in other areas when the offend email was labeled BENGHAZI. and was released on a FOIR Lawsuit about BENGHAZI. This email was released to the Republican Hearing but it was all blacked out and it was the Judical Lawsuit that got it released where you could see what the White House did not want the Congreeional Republicans to see. Just another example of the most Transparent Administration IN HISTORY. :roll: :x
 
Tam said:
Faster horses said:
Oldtimer said:
I doubt if you see anything done- because its not an issue with most folks.. Its not a coffee shop issue, a cold beer issue, a backroom bar b que issue... Most think the only thing wrong the President did was allow a diplomatic delegation to go into a country in the middle of a civil war- with no sound government to protect them... The majority agree that we shouldn't have sent in troops and invaded another sovereignty even after all hell broke lose... Most remember the lesson taught by stupidly invading the sovereign nation of Iraq...

This article echo's the changing attitude on foreign policy which is going more toward the Libertarian thinking of the US staying out of all the foreign conflicts and quit being the policemen of the world...
One of the surveys I saw a couple of weeks ago had over 60% following that attitude...

It might not be a backroom bar issue, but I know MANY people who care
about this country that are disgusted with the Obama Administration
in regards to the Benghazi cover-up in the fact the the terrorists that attacked are still out there.
Didn't Obama say they would be captured, that he wouldn't let this go?
What do you think has been done about that, OT?

Also the people on Facebook haven't let this go. There are a lot of 'Shares'
when anything about Benghazi comes up and it comes up regularly. There
are regular posts linking Hilary to Benghazi as well.

I dare say it is not an issue from Oldtimer's bar stool but if the polls are right it is from a lot of other people's stools as even 50% of DEMOCRATS believe Obama lied about the issue and I think we all (EXCEPT OLDTIMER) knows it was because he was campaigning on the idea AlQueade was on the run and it was his failed Foreign policies that lead to the preventable deaths of 4 Americans. The White House was in CYA mode and these newly released prove it. Kristen Powers was on Outnumbered today and she as a democrat doesn't believe anything Carney is saying during his press briefings about the emails and how they are supposedly about the protested in other areas when the offend email was labeled BENGHAZI. and was released on a FOIR Lawsuit about BENGHAZI. This email was released to the Republican Hearing but it was all blacked out and it was the Judical Lawsuit that got it released where you could see what the White House did not want the Congreeional Republicans to see. Just another example of the most Transparent Administration IN HISTORY. :roll: :x


Tam- not everyone sits and watches FOX News all day- or any news for that matter... I could walk out right now and ask the first 10 people on the street to explain Benghazi to me and I'll bet at least 1/2 never heard of it or don't know what it involves... Peoples interest in being Policemen of the world, getting involved in every little civil war, and what we do overseas went out the door with Iraq... CIA, diplomatic staff (spys?), and other agents die or disappear every day around the world- and we never hear about it or how it happened... People have come to the point that its such old hat, something new doesn't hardly raise an eyebrow...
 
Oldtimer said:
I saw an article the other day where the author theorized that since Congress has been dysfunctional for years and the President can't do anything because of them except by executive order-- you will see the SCOTUS taking a much more active role with more cases- and more legislating from the bench-- which neither party might like...


So let me get this right you think the Government is dysfunctional because the Republicans are obstructing the Democrat Agenda.

Let's see how it is going shall we Oldtimer, Lawyer Obama sued Citibank to get subprime mortgages for people that could not afford homes. Clinton a Democrat President opened the door to far more risky business practices within the Banks. When Bush a Republican took office he spent years warning the Congress of the risk to the economy if something was not done. The Dems stood in his way and he gets blamed for the economic crash by you because the Congress was BACKSLAPPING BUSH. :? :roll:

Now that Obama a Democrat is in the Oval Office you want the Republicans to backslap his far left agenda that has reportedly had the GDP growing by a whopping .1% as of the first quarter of 2014, that has unemployment request rising as of the last jobs report. :roll:
When the Dems had TOTAL CONTROL of the Government they passed a stimulus bill the only stimulated the Obama Donors bank accounts and created little to no real jobs. They passed the Obamacare debacle that is the main reason you are now seeing record high unemployment. Did you also hear that only 67% of the 8 million people that supposedly, by Obama's claims, signed up for Obamacare have actually paid their premiums. Which means 5.3 million of the 7 million they needed to sign up actually paid. And since that 5.3 million includes people that HAD INSURANCE AND LOST IT DUE TO OBAMACARE MANDATES does anyone really know how many of the 40 million people that never had insurance that were the ones the Dems destroyed the US Healthcare system over, actually are in the 5.3 million. Nope as the Government can't/ WON'T tell anyone as they would prove that they are not only failing at FOREIGN POLICIES BUT DOMESTIC ALSO.

BUT BLAME BUSH AND THE REPUBLICANS OLDTIMER THAT IS WHAT YOU DO WHEN ALL OTHER OBAMA DEFENSE TACTICS FAIL. :roll:

OH and if the SCOTUS gets involved it will likely be because the Executive Order Obama is using to by pass the Congress are UNCONSTITUTIONAL as in the fact the President has no Constitutional power to amended a Congressionally passed bill like he is doing with Obamacare, Immigration and just about anything else he thinks he can do. He has no Constitutional power to infringe on Religious Beliefs like he thinks he can with Obamacare.

So Yes the SCOTUS is going to get involved but it will hopefully be to REIN IN YOUR ROUGE HERO OBAMA AND HIS POWER GRAB. :mad:
 
OT wrote:
I could walk out right now and ask the first 10 people on the street to explain Benghazi to me and I'll bet at least 1/2 never heard of it or don't know what it involves...

That's probably true in Glasgow, Mt if everyone is as stupid as you. :roll:
 
Mike said:
OT wrote:
I could walk out right now and ask the first 10 people on the street to explain Benghazi to me and I'll bet at least 1/2 never heard of it or don't know what it involves...

That's probably true in Glasgow, Mt if everyone is as stupid as you. :roll:

Any one want to lay odds on how many of those 10 people Oldtimer says could not explain Benghazi, get their info from the Left Bias Media that will not cover the Benghazi Story as it proves what a liar their hero Obama really is?

You can bet if you asked those same people about who had a pregnant daughter in the 2008 Pres. Election they would know it was Palin.

They would know Romney hauled his dog on the top of his car.

They would know about Bridgegate.

They would not know Tina Fey made the comment about Russia that is accredited to Palin.

They would not know Obama ate dog meat as a young boy.

They would not Christie did not know about his aids bridge closure plan.

They like to blame Bush for lying about WMD but I'm willing to bet they would not know Bill and Hillary Clinton and a long list of Democrats supported the invasion due to their own thoughts of Saddam having WMD and was going to use them if not stopped.

The left media has spent the last 7 years protecting their Liberal Left Hero/Messiah. They have lost their credibility with their blind support of a Junior Senator due to his skin color and are not about to prove how wrong their need to make history was, when it comes to backing this Lying Piece of Crap they pole vaulted into an Office he had no rights to be sitting in due to his LACK OF EXPERIENCE IN ANYTHING BUT READING A TELEPROMPTER.

Media Credibility died with the Obama election and Oldtimer's comments about the ten people PROVES IT. What else died was Oldtimer's credibility every time he defends the crap lying coming out of this Administration.

Considering we all know the VIDEO story was a lie used to get Obama's Campaign story, of Al Queada being on the run due to his killing of Osama, passed the election, getting answers to who was responsible for all the lying is the least the Republicans can do for the families that lost their loved ones due to Hillary Clinton's Department of States incompetence of guarding fellow Americans assigned to dangerous areas on behalf of the US Government. If Hillary and her office had any part of that lie which I think we all know she did, considering her "WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE NOW" comment she needs to be held accountable unlike Obama was when it comes to her run for election.

Hold them Accountable or they will be just like the terrorists in the middle East. They step over the line with no repercussions and the next time they jump over and when nothing happens you have a full out run away when it comes to the moral legal lines of what your government will think they can get away with.
 
Step 1.

Silence the opposition by calling them racists, KKK'ers, extremists, terrorists, and conspiracy theorists for any opposition and controlling what is reported in the media.


Step 2.

Report that the silence is evidence of support of dear leaders actions and that no investigation into controversial actions are necessary.

Its not a coffee shop issue, a cold beer issue, a backroom bar b que issue...


I've found that the president is so polarizing, and dividing, that most people aren't as comfortable starting any topic about his administration. Once I state my position on the limp wristed lying SOB, it is amazing the number of people that will chime right in. The far majority.
 
I just gotta add I bet most would know who is trying to get the min. wage increased since currently its at ~ '68 levels.
 
loomixguy said:
Back in 68 a good job didn't even pay $20/day...or just $20.

I worked for the college I attended & made $1.00 per hour in 1970.

I have an idea though. With all the poverty we have, why don't we make the minimum wage $50.00 - $75.00 per hour to alleviate poverty. Then extend Unemployment Compensation to 10 years with pay that equals the minimum wage.

Problems solved!!!!!!!!
 

Latest posts

Top