(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

I don't know if it would've prevented the attack, but it could've gave him a better survival rate, we'll never know.. But f that guy right?

(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

Would lying about it being the fault of a youtube video brought him back from the dead?

(10-18-2012 11:04 AM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

Would lying about it being the fault of a youtube video brought him back from the dead?

:pwnt:

Does wearing a seat belt guarantee you survive a car crash?

BY READING THIS POST YOU RECOGNIZE THAT IMATY IS THE LAST GREAT CRUSADER FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE SO HELP YOU GOD.

Obama wants more on Welfare and Food Stamps. It is more votes for him.

Did Obama ever work a real job in his life?

(10-18-2012 11:19 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Obama wants more on Welfare and Food Stamps. It is more votes for him.

Did Obama ever work a real job in his life?

I'd rather not be on those things. By having the government provide such things it means one day the government telling you what you can eat, wear, drink, drive, go, or do.

Kinda like Cuba.

(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

Who knows?

What we do know is that, after repeated requests for additional security from the embassy to the State department, they were told, "No, and stop asking", right before people were killed in a coordinated assault on the facility, and not a spontaneous reaction to a youtube video nobody watched.

Remember when the president slammed Romney for "shooting first and aiming later" while blaming the video?

No, you probably don't.

(10-18-2012 11:23 AM)gdunn Wrote:  

(10-18-2012 11:19 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  Obama wants more on Welfare and Food Stamps. It is more votes for him.

Did Obama ever work a real job in his life?

I'd rather not be on those things. By having the government provide such things it means one day the government telling you what you can eat, wear, drink, drive, go, or do.

Kinda like Cuba.

Or New York City.

You need a license to have a dog in Seminole County FL. The government is getting ridiculous these days.

(10-18-2012 11:29 AM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  You need a license to have a dog in Seminole County FL. The government is getting ridiculous these days.

I guess Michael Vick won't be moving there anytime soon.

Mike has a dog now.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/20...a-new-dog/

(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

We'll never know, but if Obama had not given support to the rebels with documented Al Qaeda ties (after being told no by Congress) to help them overthrow the government, we likely wouldn't have ever needed additional security.

Getting back to topic, the numbers may not be as bad as they seem. Blame California and their messed up bureaucracy

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ignore-...2012-10-18

Make no mistake - the economy still sucks. But if the job claims were up as much as originally indicated, the market would be tumbling. And it's not - it's about the same on the day. So Wall Street gets it.

(10-18-2012 12:34 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  Getting back to topic, the numbers may not be as bad as they seem. Blame California and their messed up bureaucracy

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/ignore-...2012-10-18

Make no mistake - the economy still sucks. But if the job claims were up as much as originally indicated, the market would be tumbling. And it's not - it's about the same on the day. So Wall Street gets it.

Actually that's not necessarily true. The market has risen multiple times when jobless claims came in above expectations. They're artificially propped up right now by QEinfinity.

(10-18-2012 10:51 AM)Redwingtom Wrote:  Would more security have 100% prevented the attack and his death?

Why don't you ask Ambassador's Stevens family.

How can someone support Obama with all the 4 year data. The guy is a complete failure.

(10-18-2012 09:01 AM)TOGC Wrote:  First, there is no scandal.

Second, the average American voter doesn't give a fruck about Libya.

The Middle East/terrorism finished fifth or sixth in most polls for national priorities. Keep banging that drum as much as you want. No one is listening.

That must be why the big O's poll numbers are rising. Oh, wait........ Or, why this administration wants to suppress the military vote. There are a lot of military families in this country - I'd say that they most definitely care about the ME and the Libya situation.

(10-18-2012 09:01 AM)TOGC Wrote:  Conservatards just randomly make up $hit to fit their agenda. It's predictible and boring.

Never mind the FACTS right before your eyes regarding the lies told to us about Libya. Yeah, conservatives made up those facts.

What's predictable and boring is you. Loyal to a fault to an unprepared, lazy, demagogic, faux messiah who couldn't run a lemonaide stand. Nothing he could do would dissuade you from supporting this narcissist. You and him probably have a lot of traits in common.

As for the jobless numbers, remember it was California that screwed up the data last time by not reporting last week. They now have reported and the numbers show that. The current adjusted number fits in historically with other recent data.

(10-18-2012 03:04 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  How can someone support Obama with all the 4 year data. The guy is a complete failure.

Easily. We don't feel he as been a complete failure as you suggest. And we feel that Romney will only cut taxes on the top, likely cut programs for the poor, and likely spend like W did.

His preliminary military budget boondoogle is doing little to squelch those feelings.

And while O's foreign policy cred is far from perfect, I simply don't trust Romney and his Bush neocons to improve anything on that front. We tried saber rattling and that got us nowhere except despised by the globe.

Tom, if you would only lose the blinders and READ something other than DU or Huffpo you might realize that our standing in the world is worse than it was under Bush. The rest of the world sees an unprepared, inexperienced weak 'leader' who does not support our traditional allies and seems to want to play nice with those who are against us.

That is not all they see. Obama seems to have no rational foreign policy and due to that, is unpredictable. Those worried are those countries who have a military incapable of defending themselves who have traditionally relied on the U.S. as the bulwark against the totalitarians.

Talk about blinders. I don't read anything at DU, ever, other than a few things that google spits out. I don't visit that site directly. Never have and don't expect too.

And it's pretty clear that you only watch/read media that tells you what you want to believe. You read a right-wing rag that Obama blew off Netanyahoo for a tv appearance and probably believe we no longer support Israel. It's maddening what the right-wing believes.

The majority of the world hated us when W is in charge. Only a fool would argue otherwise.