brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
Wondering the same. Don't recall that tid bit.
USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
- Thread starter FadeToBlack&Gold
- Start date
- Status
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
October 1, 2012. Speech (what else?) in Nevada. "Osama is dead and al Qaida is on the path to defeat."
Repeated in several other speeches along the way to the election.
I never said Obama said AQ was defeated "completely" either. You do tend toward hyperbole.
October 1, 2012. Speech (what else?) in Nevada. "Osama is dead and al Qaida is on the path to defeat."
Repeated in several other speeches along the way to the election.
I never said Obama said AQ was defeated "completely" either. You do tend toward hyperbole.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
Might there be a tad bit of difference between saying they are "on the path to defeat" and "they are defeated"?
By sundown of June 6, 1944 Germany was "on the path" to being defeated but didn't surrender until May 7, 1945.
Speaking of hyperbole...
Might there be a tad bit of difference between saying they are "on the path to defeat" and "they are defeated"?
By sundown of June 6, 1944 Germany was "on the path" to being defeated but didn't surrender until May 7, 1945.
Speaking of hyperbole...
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
Please tell us where, in the Rose Garden speech the day after Benghazi, El Supremo stated it was a terrorist attack. Against my better judgment I'll provide a little help: you can't because he didn't.
Please tell us where, in the Rose Garden speech the day after Benghazi, El Supremo stated it was a terrorist attack. Against my better judgment I'll provide a little help: you can't because he didn't.
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
Possibly because after the death of Bin Laden, while the Field Marshall was prancing around like Heinz Guderian after the fall of France, he neglected to mention the battle wasn't over. That AQ, even without OBL, was still a force to be reckoned with. That despite how satisfying it was for that piece of garbage to take one in the face, he hadn't been the leader of AQ in any meaningful sense of the word for years.
Possibly because after the death of Bin Laden, while the Field Marshall was prancing around like Heinz Guderian after the fall of France, he neglected to mention the battle wasn't over. That AQ, even without OBL, was still a force to be reckoned with. That despite how satisfying it was for that piece of garbage to take one in the face, he hadn't been the leader of AQ in any meaningful sense of the word for years.
Last edited:
Umm...yeah...sounds like you're having a disagreement with yourself.
P
Priceless
Guest
Immediately after the attack, the president three times used the phrase “act of terror” in public statements:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”
— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12
“We want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Las Vegas, Sept. 13
“I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Golden, Colo., Sept. 13
Ooooh Opie, he said "act of terror" instead of "terrorist act"! OMG!!!!! FIRE UP THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS BABY!!!!
What an idiot.
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
And the WaPo gave him four Pinocchios for that performance. Especially the six references to a You Tube video when he fluttered in to the UN. No mention of a terrorist attack there. Just the usual Sun King crap about not disrespecting the "religion of peace."
He's a liar. And you know it.
Immediately after the attack, the president three times used the phrase “act of terror” in public statements:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”
— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12
“We want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Las Vegas, Sept. 13
“I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Golden, Colo., Sept. 13
Ooooh Opie, he said "act of terror" instead of "terrorist act"! OMG!!!!! FIRE UP THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS BABY!!!!
What an idiot.
And the WaPo gave him four Pinocchios for that performance. Especially the six references to a You Tube video when he fluttered in to the UN. No mention of a terrorist attack there. Just the usual Sun King crap about not disrespecting the "religion of peace."
He's a liar. And you know it.
Shirtless Guy
Old Dirty Basterd
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
So he said the word terror once in a speech with over 800 words. Obviously he avoided saying it as much as possible.
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
For what? Vomiting up WH talking points? He did not unequivocally state the murder of an ambassador and three others was a terrorist attack. Boiler plate rhetoric, coming very late in his speech, merely covers his a*s so he can act and sound presidential. You conveniently overlook the several media interviews he gave in the next few days where he ducked the question entirely. And that groveling performance before the UN when he blamed a video nobody had ever heard of, let alone seen, for the attacks. Six mentions of the video. Zero mentions of terrorism or terrorists. At a minimum, you're being extremely selective here.
He didn't declare the attack in Benghazi as an "act of terror." And no amount of ex post facto legerdemain can change that fact. Four Pinocchios from the WaPo. Or are they part of the "vast right wing conspiracy," too? He's a liar, who put his re-election ahead of the deaths of four Americans, whose safety was his responsibility. "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
For what? Vomiting up WH talking points? He did not unequivocally state the murder of an ambassador and three others was a terrorist attack. Boiler plate rhetoric, coming very late in his speech, merely covers his a*s so he can act and sound presidential. You conveniently overlook the several media interviews he gave in the next few days where he ducked the question entirely. And that groveling performance before the UN when he blamed a video nobody had ever heard of, let alone seen, for the attacks. Six mentions of the video. Zero mentions of terrorism or terrorists. At a minimum, you're being extremely selective here.
He didn't declare the attack in Benghazi as an "act of terror." And no amount of ex post facto legerdemain can change that fact. Four Pinocchios from the WaPo. Or are they part of the "vast right wing conspiracy," too? He's a liar, who put his re-election ahead of the deaths of four Americans, whose safety was his responsibility. "What difference, at this point, does it make?"
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
So the argument changed from "he didn't say it and he lied about it" to "he didn't mention it enough".
Would you have preferred he just stand in the Rose Garden and say the word "Terror" 800 times?
O'Reilly is right. Obama could cure cancer and Republicans would still find a reason to complain.
So the argument changed from "he didn't say it and he lied about it" to "he didn't mention it enough".
Would you have preferred he just stand in the Rose Garden and say the word "Terror" 800 times?
O'Reilly is right. Obama could cure cancer and Republicans would still find a reason to complain.
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
These aren't talking points. It's the text of the speech.
You asked, I answered. The fact that the answer isn't what you wanted to hear isn't my problem. Have fun with your conspiracy theories.
Good day.
These aren't talking points. It's the text of the speech.
You asked, I answered. The fact that the answer isn't what you wanted to hear isn't my problem. Have fun with your conspiracy theories.
Good day.
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
He did not claim that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Period. And you're simply intellectually incapable of acknowledging that fact.
He did not claim that the attack in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Period. And you're simply intellectually incapable of acknowledging that fact.
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
How many watertight bulkheads did the Titanic have? I've forgotten.
After an opening paragraph devoted to expressing grief and support for the victims and their families, El Nixoni said: "The United States condemns, in the strongest terms, this outrageous and shocking. . .attack." The ellipses are where the word "terrorist" might have been inserted in the text to establish that he was calling it a terror attack. Alternatively, he could have followed with a statement condemning in the "strongest terms" terrorism in this case or in any other. He did neither.
He found time to speak out forcefully against those "who denigrate the religious beliefs of others" ( hint, hint, the video). It was only toward the end, that he made a generic reference to "acts of terror." He simply did not describe the attack in Benghazi a terror attack. And he didn't for days afterward, despite knowing that an AQ affiliate was responsible. As Shirtless pointed out, using the word "terror" once, late in a speech of 800 words, seems more like an effort to keep his options open (to have it both ways), than an angry president denouncing the murders of four Americans. And Candy Crowley (forever looking like an unmade bed) was right there to help. Bottom line: those who claim El Nixoni described the assault in Benghazi as a terror attack are giving him the benefit of the doubt the record clearly shows he doesn't deserve.
Here's the speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7KkqVX1D3w
How many watertight bulkheads did the Titanic have? I've forgotten.
After an opening paragraph devoted to expressing grief and support for the victims and their families, El Nixoni said: "The United States condemns, in the strongest terms, this outrageous and shocking. . .attack." The ellipses are where the word "terrorist" might have been inserted in the text to establish that he was calling it a terror attack. Alternatively, he could have followed with a statement condemning in the "strongest terms" terrorism in this case or in any other. He did neither.
He found time to speak out forcefully against those "who denigrate the religious beliefs of others" ( hint, hint, the video). It was only toward the end, that he made a generic reference to "acts of terror." He simply did not describe the attack in Benghazi a terror attack. And he didn't for days afterward, despite knowing that an AQ affiliate was responsible. As Shirtless pointed out, using the word "terror" once, late in a speech of 800 words, seems more like an effort to keep his options open (to have it both ways), than an angry president denouncing the murders of four Americans. And Candy Crowley (forever looking like an unmade bed) was right there to help. Bottom line: those who claim El Nixoni described the assault in Benghazi as a terror attack are giving him the benefit of the doubt the record clearly shows he doesn't deserve.
Here's the speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T7KkqVX1D3w
Last edited:
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
I said "Good day"
I said "Good day"
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
A great American president had a sign on his desk which read: "The buck stops here."
A great American president had a sign on his desk which read: "The buck stops here."
Last edited:
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
Is his name Admiral John Poindexter?
"What difference, at this point, does it make?"
Is his name Admiral John Poindexter?
P
Priceless
Guest
Re: 2nd Term - Part 3 - Echo Chambers, Chorales, and Wingnuts, Oh My!
Liberals Groups Received IRS Scrutiny
I am outraged!!!!!1111!!!!!
IMPEACH!!!!!!!1111!!!!!
Liberals Groups Received IRS Scrutiny
I am outraged!!!!!1111!!!!!
IMPEACH!!!!!!!1111!!!!!
- Status