john9blue wrote:Dukasaur wrote:john9blue wrote:how do you honestly expect me to guess what kind of bullshit your irrational mind has spewed out tonight?
It's not bullshit. It's there in plain black and white if you would bother to read it.
Here's Phatscotty, quoting Ron Paul, whom he pretends to agree with (key sentence in red):
Subject: BenghaziPhatscotty wrote:Ron Paul wrote:But the Republicans in Congress also want to shift the blame. They supported the Obama Administration’s policy of bombing Libya and overthrowing its government. They also repeated the same manufactured claims that Gaddafi was “killing his own people” and was about to commit mass genocide if he were not stopped. Republicans want to draw attention to the President’s editing talking points in hopes no one will notice that if the attack on Libya they supported had not taken place, Ambassador Stevens would be alive today.
(...)
The real lesson of Benghazi will not be learned because neither Republicans nor Democrats want to hear it. But it is our interventionist foreign policy and its unintended consequences that have created these problems, including the attack and murder of Ambassador Stevens. The disputed talking points and White House whitewashing are just a sideshow.
http://www.the-free-foundation.org/tst5-13-2013.html
And 3 pages later, here is Phatscotty, professional Republican schill, doing
EXACTLY what Paul warned about, which is trying to draw attention to the "talking points" scandal to distract attention from the fact that the interventionist policies embraced by
EQUALLY by
BOTH slug parties are the real problem:
Subject: BenghaziPhatscotty wrote:Obama will be impeached. Maybe he can survive it, but that won't matter.
It will leave a stain on him, FOREVER!!!
Can't change history, or the lies the Obama administration has been telling.
Official White House statement, 4 days after terrorist attack in Benghazi
good post, this is what i was looking for. it looks to me like scotty got too caught up in his dislike for democrats.
although i must ask you to not color important text red after telling me that it will be in black and white. very misleading...
the impeachment post was targeted specifically to a poster, based on what that poster said. Other acceptable answers: I was trolled
as for the specific part in red, that is the specific part I said earlier I didn't agree with. Like I also said earlier, Obama gave orders to strike Libya without Congressional approval. Like I asked earlier, which Republicans are those?????? Is Ron Paul talking about his Republican son Ran Paul? Like I said, Obama did not ask Congress. If someone can please tell me which Republicans "supported" the intervention in Libya, I will call them a bad name, in public, so that you can feel better. Deal?
Truth is, There is something to be said about the response to Benghazi (the youtube boogyman video).
Truth is, I don't care what party a person is in when it comes to unloading a steaming pile of bullshit
I agree with Ron Paul's overall message about interventionalism, as you know. If you think the overall point of Paul's post was to tell people to give the Democrats a break, or let Obama off the hook for his lying, or saying we should just accept lies, then I think you missed the point, at least according to me (the one who shared it)
The result of interventionalism is one thing, how the investigation plays out of a weapon smuggling cover up as a result of post-intervention Libyan geopolitics perpetrated by Obama is another.
This is a cover up, and Obama kept the truth from the American people, not only because it's against the law and could lead to impeachment (not likely at all, only possible), but also so he could keep the truth from the American people and get re-elected
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=178303&hilit=susan+rice&start=45#p3900460