NYTimes: Al-Qaeda not behind Bengahzi attacks (video in part to blame)

[Matt1970]

Listen up, twit for brains. There were thousands of Vietnam protests too, but only one Kent State. There are hundreds (if not thousands) of abortion protests, yet very few bombings. Etc. Etc. Etc. The same cause will yield different responses by different actors in different circumstances. It's a simple enough concept that I'm confident even your slimy little brain can grasp it. Therefore, I can state that since you are knowingly and willingly making false comments, you are a liar. Kindly join Inconsequential in the club of totally useless P&N noisebots.

And here come the insults. Your examples prove my point. Think about it, abortion bombings don't just spontaneously happen from abortion protests do they? Someone has to plan that out ahead of time, and ya know, bring a Bomb. Kent State was not a result of the protesters, but if you want to use that as an example, than surely something similar would have happened at one of the many other protests. If facing the truth is enraging you this much I think you should take a break from this for a while.

 

[Bowfinger]

When was this? If his lips are moving;He's lying.
Q:Who got the "pants on fire" of the year award?

Not about Benghazi, he didn't, which is the subject of this thread. Try to keep up.

 

[Bowfinger]

And here come the insults. Your examples prove my point. Think about it, abortion bombings don't just spontaneously happen from abortion protests do they? Someone has to plan that out ahead of time, and ya know, bring a Bomb. Kent State was not a result of the protesters, but if you want to use that as an example, than surely something similar would have happened at one of the many other protests. If facing the truth is enraging you this much I think you should take a break from this for a while.

It is liars who "enrage" me, especially when it takes a protracted debate to corner one into acknowledging such a simple, obvious truth. The same cause can and regularly does trigger different responses. I'm an old-fashioned guy. I believe a person's integrity is the single most important measure of worth, far more than money or career or toys. You fall far short of my standards.

You are dismissed.

 

[Matt1970]

It is liars who "enrage" me, especially when it takes a protracted debate to corner one into acknowledging such a simple, obvious truth. The same cause can and regularly does trigger different responses. I'm an old-fashioned guy. I believe a person's integrity is the single most important measure of worth, far more than money or career or toys. You fall far short of my standards.

You are dismissed.

Aww baby, but we have been through so much together......

 

[schmuckley]

Bhenghazi is on Hillary Clinton.
Requests were made for more security;She denied them.
She had "headache" when she was supposed to answer questions.
It's also on Obama;He went to bed instead of ordering assistance for the ambassador.
Wars have been started over less than Bhenghazi.

 

[Tom]

The scary part is that youre serious about this.

You bet. And those are the reasons, the next President will be a Democrat.

 

[ivwshane]

Bubble intact!

 

[ivwshane]

Bhenghazi is on Hillary Clinton.
Requests were made for more security;She denied them.
She had "headache" when she was supposed to answer questions.
It's also on Obama;He went to bed instead of ordering assistance for the ambassador.
Wars have been started over less than Bhenghazi.

You should get some new sources for your news, you are grossly ignorant of the facts.

 

[Matt1970]

You bet. And those are the reasons, the next President will be a Democrat.

You do realize even the Democrats on here say you were wrong on 3 out of 5 of those.

 

[theeedude]

Stopped to early? It was spread out over years. If anything it would have had better effects if it were spent quicker. You don't put out a fire by sprinkling water on it.

Two years is nothing considering the size of the overhang from the financial crisis.

 

[Tom]

1. According to Obama all the best experts claimed this is all we needed to get the economy back on track. Saying it wasn't enough is armchair quarterbacking.
5. I don't remember anyone campaigning the Obamacare was about getting people on better insurance or on Medicaid. 20 years to find out if Obamacare was a success or not? Uhhh, no.

That's just total BS. Obama and the treasury secretary said all along more was needed and they still do. And I don't mean more stimulus, although that might be the case, I mean more work and effort.

Which he has continued to do, for example finally forcing the Republicans to give up part of the Bush tax cuts. Which was a very difficult process because the Republicans insist on using taxes as a political ploy, not any concern for what's best for the country.

It is a FACT that the direction of the economy changed and that unemployment has gone down.

Saying THAT makes him the worst President ever is just ridiculous rhetoric.

 

[Matt1970]

Two years is nothing considering the size of the overhang from the financial crisis.

It would have been better to dump the money into the economy all at once.

 

[berzerker60]

You do realize even the Democrats on here say you were wrong on 3 out of 5 of those.

I agreed with you on 3/5. That doesn't mean "the Democrats" do.

 

[Matt1970]

Before the stimulus was even finalized:
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/economist-obama-stimulus-not-enough/

Shortly after:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/13/opinion/13fri1.html?ref=opinion

Several months later:
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2009/07/artificial_stimulus.html

In 2012 he asked for more stimulus spending as well:
http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/may/12/obama-pushes-billion-dollar-stimulus-plan/


Get out of your fucking bubble! Your posts are reaching the level of incorruptible's and nobody should want that!

If every economic expert at the time thought it was too small, you would have a hell of a lot more links than that and certainly some argument after Obama said it was the right size.

 

[schmuckley]

You should get some new sources for your news, you are grossly ignorant of the facts.

hmm..have links?
PS:It's saddening to see liberal indoctrination results.They are very evident around here.

 

[theeedude]

It would have been better to dump the money into the economy all at once.

Stimulus needs to be on same scale AND duration as GDP shortfall from the crisis. It's not rocket surgery. There is no confidence fairy to make the economy take off when you withdraw stimulus prematurely.

 

[Matt1970]

That's just total BS. Obama and the treasury secretary said all along more was needed and they still do. And I don't mean more stimulus, although that might be the case, I mean more work and effort.

Which he has continued to do, for example finally forcing the Republicans to give up part of the Bush tax cuts. Which was a very difficult process because the Republicans insist on using taxes as a political ploy, not any concern for what's best for the country.

It is a FACT that the direction of the economy changed and that unemployment has gone down.

Saying THAT makes him the worst President ever is just ridiculous rhetoric.

No, Obama was saying the Stimulus was the right amount.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=kuGOfWSJ1fM#t=134

 

[ivwshane]

If every economic expert at the time thought it was too small, you would have a hell of a lot more links than that and certainly some argument after Obama said it was the right size.

We'll let me just compare it to your links and citations...oh wait!

 

[Incorruptible]

Stimulus spending doesn't work. The best way to fix the economy would have been not bailout the banks along with cuts in spending, taxes and regulations.

 

[theeedude]

Stimulus spending doesn't work. The best way to fix the economy would have been not bailout the banks along with cuts in spending, taxes and regulations.

If by "fix" you mean "destroy" then yes.

 

[Matt1970]

Stimulus needs to be on same scale AND duration as GDP shortfall from the crisis. It's not rocket surgery. There is no confidence fairy to make the economy take off when you withdraw stimulus prematurely.

The term is rocket science, a scalpel won't do a whole heck of a lot to a rocket. Maybe it should be rocket science anyways since this is what a lot of those so called economic experts predicted would happen from the Stimulus:

 

[ivwshane]

hmm..have links?
PS:It's saddening to see liberal indoctrination results.They are very evident around here.

Here is a good start:

www.google.com

Hint: there is no one source for accurate info

 

[Matt1970]

We'll let me just compare it to your links and citations...oh wait!

Paul Krugman saying he would like to see a bigger stimulus = Pretty much every economic expert said it wasn't enough at the time? Come on now, the whole economic community disagreeing with Obama and you can only produce one link?

 

[ivwshane]

No, Obama was saying the Stimulus was the right amount.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=kuGOfWSJ1fM#t=134

It's funny because you posted the video but apparently you didn't watch it. Btw, in the first three minutes he talks about things that need to be done, how many of those things were done? Why was he asking for more stimulus money several years later? Why would he say, in the speech, that the recovery would take years?

 

[ivwshane]

Paul Krugman saying he would like to see a bigger stimulus = Pretty much every economic expert said it wasn't enough at the time? Come on now, the whole economic community disagreeing with Obama and you can only produce one link?

Is there a particular economic expert you'd like me to link to. I'll admit I don't know every economist, do you?

Btw, I posted multiple links.