Sen Rand Paul blasts Hilary Clinton: 'Let’s face it, you should have been fired over Benghazi'

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2013 7:44 PM GMT
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2013 11:32 PM GMT
    Of course, no one bothers to comment. They think it's absurd for anyone to think Hillary could possibly be incompetent or negligent.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 23, 2013 11:59 PM GMT
    Blakes7 saidOf course, no one bothers to comment. They think it's absurd for anyone to think Hillary could possibly be incompetent or negligent.


    Probably because no one here said she was either incompetent or negligent. In fact Sen. Paul said he didn't think she was negligent.

    What we do have here is Ridder78 doing what he does which is cutting and pasting links with no sign of independent thought and you expecting people to argue against claims that were not made.

    Perhaps if you actually make the case for Clinton's incompetence or negligence someone would engage you in a discussion on the topic.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 12:04 AM GMT
    They did nothing before, and nothing but lie about it afterwards. That seems either incompetent, negligent, or both to me.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 12:07 AM GMT
    Blakes7 saidThey did nothing before, and nothing but lie about it afterwards. That seems either incompetent, negligent, or both to me.


    Hillary is a "they"? Which lies did she tell before or after? Honestly I have not followed her comments on the matter to closely since most of the focus seemed to be on Susan Rice.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 1:05 AM GMT
    They - meaning Obama, Hillary, Rice, and whoever else was involved in lying to the press. Normally that annoys the press to no end, I wonder why they overlook it now.......icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 1:16 AM GMT
    Blakes7 saidThey - meaning Obama, Hillary, Rice, and whoever else was involved in lying to the press. Normally that annoys the press to no end, I wonder why they overlook it now.......icon_wink.gif


    Okay, so you have made no case for Clinton being either negligent or incompetent and when asked for what "lies" she told with resect to Benghazi you have offered none. You are now trying to move the conversation to Obama and Rice as well as the press.

    It seems your complaint that no one wanted to talk about Clinton was somewhat disingenuous as I have offered to do to indulge you in that conversation but you seem to want to discuss other things instead.

    Cheers and good luck to you.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 2:45 PM GMT
    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/012313-641705-hillary-clinton-testify-benghazi-ambassador-terrorism.htm?src=IBDDAE
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 5:01 PM GMT
    3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi
    http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/24/3-incredibly-outrageous-evasions-by-hill
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 5:04 PM GMT
    riddler78 said3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi
    http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/24/3-incredibly-outrageous-evasions-by-hill


    Two opinion pieces copied and pasted by Riddler!
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 5:09 PM GMT
    Rand Paul is queer and not in a good queer sort of way.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 5:53 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    The_Gingerhead_Man said
    Blakes7 saidOf course, no one bothers to comment. They think it's absurd for anyone to think Hillary could possibly be incompetent or negligent.

    Probably because no one here said she was either incompetent or negligent. In fact Sen. Paul said he didn't think she was negligent.
    What we do have here is Ridder78 doing what he does which is cutting and pasting links with no sign of independent thought and you expecting people to argue against claims that were not made.
    Perhaps if you actually make the case for Clinton's incompetence or negligence someone would engage you in a discussion on the topic.

    The point made by Rand Paul was very obvious, whether or not you agree with him. It was that Hillary not reading the continual requests for help from an Ambassador in a dangerous area was a dereliction of duty.

    The_Gingerhead_Man said
    riddler78 said3 Incredibly Outrageous Evasions by Hillary Clinton About Benghazi
    http://reason.com/blog/2013/01/24/3-incredibly-outrageous-evasions-by-hill


    Two opinion pieces copied and pasted by Riddler!

    What was the point of this message other than waste space? Why don't you worry about the continual links that Metta8 posts, or qw..... same thing? You're doing nothing but blowing hot air.


    I had made the claim earlier that riddler78 simply posts links to things without showing in sort of independent thought. That post simply backed up my claim.
    Pretty simple.

    I didn't realize that I had some sort of obligation to worry about each individual member of RJ and what they posting.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 7:25 PM GMT
    topathlete said
    The_Gingerhead_Man saidI had made the claim earlier that riddler78 simply posts links to things without showing in sort of independent thought. That post simply backed up my claim.
    Pretty simple.

    I didn't realize that I had some sort of obligation to worry about each individual member of RJ and what they posting.

    I have seen any number of threads where riddler will become actively involved in discussions about the links he posts if there is intelligent discussion that follows in the thread.

    If you're going to criticize the forum conduct of one member while remaining silent about the same conduct of others, some very obvious, then you demonstrate another agenda. Why not yourself deal with substantive facts instead of doing a non-substantive play-by-play of riddler's posts?


    Riddler likes to make this agenda claim as well when people say things he doesn't like. He lobbed that one at me when I explained how unemployment data was collected. You know, because nothing says agenda like explaining survey methodology. It is intellectually lazy on both yours and his part as you are basically making an ad hominem attack. You are going after me rather than taking on the claims I have made. The fact of the matter is Riddler more often than not posts links to other things rather than actually offering unique opinion or any sort of analysis of what he is offering.

    I in fact tried to engage in a discussion here with Blakes7 when he seemed offended that no one wanted to discuss Clinton. I entered the conversation in good faith and tried to engage him but as you can see he wouldn't answer my questions and just kept trying to shift the subject to other things.

    So you are concerned that I am not somehow playing fair, I think Smartmoney's comment was inane and just more of the partisan rhetoric that makes political discussions here so terrible.


  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 8:48 PM GMT
    We start from a different premise. I like conversation, but it's too tedious if I have to write a book explaining everything from the very beginning. I'm sorry if that disappoints you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 9:08 PM GMT
    The_Gingerhead_Man, what I do to make their posts make sense is simply imagine the following words prefacing all their posts.

    "Look, I have an ideological agenda and I'm desperate, so..(then read post)"

    Generally, what I've found is that these guys usually end up in the position of governor Chris Christie, and their day will come.

    It's been pointed out in past topics that when the GOP was in power much worse incidents occurred than Benghazi. These guys had zip to say then, which is equivalent to a giant shouting out of their agenda. It's only awful if a Liberal is involved.
    If this was the GOP and Hillary was in her position as a Republican, Riddler would never have posted this topic. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 24, 2013 10:35 PM GMT
    meninlove said The_Gingerhead_Man, what I do to make their posts make sense is simply imagine the following words prefacing all their posts.

    "Look, I have an ideological agenda and I'm desperate, so..(then read post)"

    Generally, what I've found is that these guys usually end up in the position of governor Chris Christie, and their day will come.

    It's been pointed out in past topics that when the GOP was in power much worse incidents occurred than Benghazi. These guys had zip to say then, which is equivalent to a giant shouting out of their agenda. It's only awful if a Liberal is involved.
    If this was the GOP and Hillary was in her position as a Republican, Riddler would never have posted this topic. icon_wink.gif


    So says a man so feebly minded that he gets decimated on any issue of substance icon_rolleyes.gif. This post incidentally was posted in response to another forum topic started by metta that was deliberately one-sided. So it's kind of a telling rorschach test which you apparently fail and the sad part is that you're even unable to see it. icon_wink.gif Better luck next time
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 25, 2013 1:00 AM GMT
    As someone else pointed out, it's ironic that despite being a feminist icon, Hilary Clinton finds herself in the same position of protecting a powerful man...

    http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/driveby/hillarys_2016_campaign_st.php

    aaaclinton2016.jpg
  • musclmed

    Posts: 3284

    Jan 25, 2013 3:31 AM GMT
    riddler78 saidAs someone else pointed out, it's ironic that despite being a feminist icon, Hilary Clinton finds herself in the same position of protecting a powerful man...

    http://americandigest.org/mt-archives/driveby/hillarys_2016_campaign_st.php

    aaaclinton2016.jpg


    Its pretty clear Clinton had nothing to do with Susan Rice circus. She probably was asked and turned it down. Do not underestimate how shrewd she is .

  • shutoman

    Posts: 505

    Jan 28, 2013 1:19 PM GMT
    Well, if that is indeed what he said, I disagree with Rand Paul.