birdog1960 Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 How can a supposedly heterogeneous group consider part of the population as "others"? because they set themselves apart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jauronimo Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 because they set themselves apart. From who? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
meazza Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 From who? From the population. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 In other news, Benghazi is now a fading story, but Gun Control stories are back to trending higher again. Thought you'd find this article interesting. http://townhall.com/...ergate-n1590848 But what about the American people? Really? Think about that for a few moments. Now … you’re not telling me that the same people who put this colossal failure back into the White House for four more years is going to get worked up over Benghazi, are you? Let me tell you what the American people are concerned with right now – and we’re talking about those who aren’t gunched up with 24/7 discussions about college football recruiting and gay NBA players. In a nutshell (and thank goodness for the few exceptions we DO have) the majority of the American people are more worried right now about acquiring and keeping their monthly checks from the government than they are about 0bama’s lies or foreign policy failures. They think a Benghazi is a small yappy dog. These people are more concerned about next Winter’s home heating assistance checks than they are about dead ambassadors. They’re worrying about getting more federal dollars for child care to help them take care of the next tricycle motor they’re fixin’ to download without the benefit of a husband. They’re wondering who is going to pay their medical bills, and how they can get their hands on one of those great Section 8 housing vouchers. Some are looking to upgrade their 0bamaPhones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 I'm sure he was about to get picked up for parole violations just before the WH and State Dept. chose to pin Stevens's death on him instead of, y'know, telling the truth. Maybe, maybe not. Regardless...he pleaded guilty to parole violations he actually did commit, and is serving a year for them. The real question you want to ask is "Why was he picked up to begin with?" If you get picked up on a bogus claim of unpaid parking tickets, the police don't turn around and release you if they discover there's a warrant out for armed robbery on you afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Maybe, maybe not. Regardless...he pleaded guilty to parole violations he actually did commit, and is serving a year for them. The real question you want to ask is "Why was he picked up to begin with?" If you get picked up on a bogus claim of unpaid parking tickets, the police don't turn around and release you if they discover there's a warrant out for armed robbery on you afterwards. If I recall correctly he was picked up at his home with about a whole platoon of cops and possibly some federal agents too. This was no normal pickup. I'll look it up later. Does anyone even remember his name? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 (edited) wrong picture. except that do no harm is rule number 1 in my job and i abide it...i better be harmless. never had a ponytail and never will. here's your picture: short, informally parted hair, chinos, checked oxford shirt, comfortable shoes and a decent watch. (hmmm, i can even picture me,maybe i can write a novel when i retire). Hmmmm. You're a lesbian? 'Gregory Hicks, the No. 2 U.S. diplomat in Libya the night Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans were killed, was to be the star witness for Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), the man leading the probe of the Obama administration’s handling of the attack on the diplomatic outpost in Benghazi. But despite Issa’s incautious promise that the hearing’s revelations would be “damaging” to Hillary Rodham Clinton, Hicks didn’t lay a glove on the former secretary of state Wednesday. Hicks was of little use to Republicans in their efforts to connect the lapses in the Benghazi response to Clinton or to the Obama White House. He said that he spoke to Clinton by phone at 2 a.m. that night and that she supported his actions. He undermined one of Issa’s claims — that Clinton had rejected an increase in security for the Libya facilities — when he agreed that the secretary of state’s name appears on all cables, even if she doesn’t write them.' http://www.washingto...7add_story.html It's Pavlovian. Even when a poster specifically calls it earlier in the thread, Pasta Joe still can't help himself. Dude, I saw the shortest soundbite/clip possible on the local news this morning....and it still sucks for Hillary. I've seen the whole dialogue, and they cut out the worst, but the part they left...still sucks. The average low info voter isn't being cut out of this one, they just can't keep the lid on anymore. No amount of wriggling by you, spin doctors acting as journalists, or Hillary herself, is going to un-F this thing. I still say she would be infinitely better at the job than President Petulant. But, I also know that this thing isn't going away, ever, and barring a miracle, this means she's done. Yell/talk all you want, when you get done, this will remain. Edited May 9, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 9, 2013 Share Posted May 9, 2013 Maybe, maybe not. Regardless...he pleaded guilty to parole violations he actually did commit, and is serving a year for them. The real question you want to ask is "Why was he picked up to begin with?" If you get picked up on a bogus claim of unpaid parking tickets, the police don't turn around and release you if they discover there's a warrant out for armed robbery on you afterwards. "Nakoula Basseley Nakoula deserves a place in American history." "He is the first person in this country jailed for violating Islamic anti-blasphemy laws." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 From the Rich Lowry article that B-man just linked: Lo and behold, Nakoula was brought in for questioning by five Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at midnight, eventually arrested and held without bond, and finally thrown into jail for a year. He sits in La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Texas right now, even as the deceptive spin that blamed his video for the Benghazi attack looks more egregious by the day. Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2013/05/the-benghazi-patsy-91101.html#ixzz2SqMvY7iJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 "Nakoula Basseley Nakoula deserves a place in American history." "He is the first person in this country jailed for violating Islamic anti-blasphemy laws." Yeah, I read the same OPINION pieces. Which are still bull ****...he was jailed for violating his parole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Yeah, I read the same OPINION pieces. Which are still bull ****...he was jailed for violating his parole. I thought the Rich Lowry article in Political was pretty fair. NBN was sent to prison for violating his parole by using an alias. Normally he probably wouldn't have been sent to prison but the publicity and weight behind it made this happen. He actually deserves a good ass whipping or more. He tricked the actors into performing in his video and dubbed in later the slams against Muhommad, thus possibly putting their lives at stake. I don't give 2 schits about this guy. I do give a schit about what appears to be malfeasance and dishonesty at the very top of our government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) Yeah, I read the same OPINION pieces. Which are still bull ****...he was jailed for violating his parole. “If you're going to say what you want to say, you're going to hear what you don't want to hear.” -- Roberto Bolaño . Edited May 10, 2013 by B-Man Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 From the Rich Lowry article that B-man just linked: Lo and behold, Nakoula was brought in for questioning by five Los Angeles County sheriff’s deputies at midnight, eventually arrested and held without bond, and finally thrown into jail for a year. He sits in La Tuna Federal Correctional Institution in Texas right now, even as the deceptive spin that blamed his video for the Benghazi attack looks more egregious by the day. Read more: http://www.politico....l#ixzz2SqMvY7iJ And the deceptive spin about his video IS NOT THE REASON HE'S IN JAIL. He's in jail - after a bail hearing in which he was denied bail because he had multiple aliases and was deemed a flight risk, and after he pleaded guilty to four parole violations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCinBuffalo Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) I couldn't care less if a liar goes to jail for one reason or another. What we ALL must care about is the fact that the government: 1. Was failing 2. Was warned that it was failing 3. Failed anyway 4. Lied about failure and the height of absurdity: blamed youtube 5. Tried to play save ass, because of the campaign, instead of being accountable for the failure 6. Lied to Congress when the save ass part didn't work, because of the campaign 7. Tried to play it off when it was caught lying @ #4 8. Stonewalled in order to cover for the lie at @ #4 9. Failed at stonewalling due to inevitability that there was at least 2 decent people at State who weren't going to allow it to continue 10. Tried to play off lie @ #6, since now the stone wall is broken 11. Failed to play it off, and sent out Press secretary to say "it was a long time ago" (How in the sam hell did they think that was going to work. How incompetent do you have to go with that as plan A? ) 12. Thinks that this whole thing will blow over 13. Does not seem to get that when the Kathy Sunshine and Bobby Happy do the story at 6:30 am...when they usually do stories about girl scouts and whatevertheF is happening at the zoo? It's your ass. Kathy and Bobby have seen this story now. And these brainless nincompoops, and those that watch them, must now attempt to comprehend it. So, there will be questions from Kathy and Bobby, and "viewers" too. Which means, the networks will have to get somebody to get answers to those questions. Those people should have been driving this, now they are being forced to do their jobs, because unmitigated morons 1 and 2 have to be prepped for whatever "the story" is tomorrow. It remains to be seen whether they will do their jobs earnestly and professionally. But, there is no "blow over". Edited May 10, 2013 by OCinBuffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 (edited) And the deceptive spin about his video IS NOT THE REASON HE'S IN JAIL. He's in jail - after a bail hearing in which he was denied bail because he had multiple aliases and was deemed a flight risk, and after he pleaded guilty to four parole violations. Five LA deputies went to the guy's house at midnight and picked him up for a parole violation. It never would have happened if the WH didn't need a scapegoat. Nobody bothers you in LA unless you're killing someone, robbing a bank in a creative manner, or driving crazy...and even then they leave you alone unless it's daylight and the local TV stations can follow it. Yes, we get it. He's in prison for parole violation. How he got picked up for that should be obvious. Edited May 10, 2013 by LABillzFan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 And the deceptive spin about his video IS NOT THE REASON HE'S IN JAIL. He's in jail - after a bail hearing in which he was denied bail because he had multiple aliases and was deemed a flight risk, and after he pleaded guilty to four parole violations. I'll give your silly ass a pass, did you not see my post#171 in this thread? You are arguing with the wrong person. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 Surprisingly, ABC News' Jonathan Carl nails Hillary's spokesperson today with an email that specifically pulls all terrorist links in Benghazi talking points so it won't be used against her. I'm mostly surprised someone other than Sharyl Atkisson has opted to keep digging. http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2013/05/exclusive-benghazi-talking-points-underwent-12-revisions-scrubbed-of-terror-references/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillsFan-4-Ever Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 haven't the GOP nut bags beaten this dead horse long enough? Of the 50 terror attacks under Dubya how many had more than 3 inquiries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 haven't the GOP nut bags beaten this dead horse long enough? Of the 50 terror attacks under Dubya how many had more than 3 inquiries? If the W.H and State Department would have been forthcoming to begin with, this wouldn't be an issue any longer, however now that we do know that they did indeed purposely mislead the public for political reasons fearing backlash and incompetence, and that new information continues to keep dripping out, then to answer your question, no, no they haven't. Surprisingly, ABC News' Jonathan Carl nails Hillary's spokesperson today with an email that specifically pulls all terrorist links in Benghazi talking points so it won't be used against her. I'm mostly surprised someone other than Sharyl Atkisson has opted to keep digging. http://abcnews.go.co...ror-references/ Let's just remember that just yesterday Jay Carney said: White House spokesman Jay Carney today blamed the intelligence agencies for the administration’s effort to hide Al Qaeda’s role in the lethal jihadi attack last September on the U.S. diplomatic site in Benghazi, Libya. “The intelligence community drafted and redrafted these [public affairs] points… the fact that there are inputs from others doesn’t change the fact that the CIA, the intelligence community, drafted these points,” he told reporters at the daily briefing. Asked if White House officials made any changes, Carney claimed that “the only edits were stylistic and non-substantive.” Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/05/08/white-house-denies-changing-benghazi-intelligence-reports/#ixzz2StsArxC1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted May 10, 2013 Share Posted May 10, 2013 haven't the GOP nut bags beaten this dead horse long enough? Of the 50 terror attacks under Dubya how many had more than 3 inquiries? Please post a link/links to your statement. BTW, I thought you were done with PPP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts