My point was more about the fact that the state of an economy at time t is not a product of the president at time t, but rather a product of a more complicated system which doesn't divide itself into presidential term sized chunks.
I don't think I share your assumption about how markets are best left to their own devices.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
Ryan was hilarious. I was in stitches listening to him speak. Especially the 'unemployment rate goes down, but unemployment rate in some city went up, thus that's what's happening in the rest of America'.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
Ryan was hilarious. I was in stitches listening to him speak. Especially the 'unemployment rate goes down, but unemployment rate in some city went up, thus that's what's happening in the rest of America'.
Too funny.
exactly, it was comical.
HEY. Romney doesn't care about Detroit? Romney -- HE'S A CAR GUY.
BoooooooooooooOOOOOOOOM MUTHAFUCKAS!!! SIGNED KISSMYASS@RYAN.WHITEHOUSE.COM.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
Ryan was hilarious. I was in stitches listening to him speak. Especially the 'unemployment rate goes down, but unemployment rate in some city went up, thus that's what's happening in the rest of America'.
Too funny.
exactly, it was comical.
HEY. Romney doesn't care about Detroit? Romney -- HE'S A CAR GUY.
BoooooooooooooOOOOOOOOM MUTHAFUCKAS!!! SIGNED KISSMYASS@RYAN.WHITEHOUSE.COM.
Hard to really say anything else It was pretty funny how little he could say.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
Ryan was hilarious. I was in stitches listening to him speak. Especially the 'unemployment rate goes down, but unemployment rate in some city went up, thus that's what's happening in the rest of America'.
Too funny.
exactly, it was comical.
HEY. Romney doesn't care about Detroit? Romney -- HE'S A CAR GUY.
BoooooooooooooOOOOOOOOM MUTHAFUCKAS!!! SIGNED KISSMYASS@RYAN.WHITEHOUSE.COM.
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
1. The security requests were mostly for the embassy in Tripoli, not the facility in Bengazi 2. Those security requests did not reach the White House but were dealt with by low- (and possibly mid-) level State Department employees.
Ok? What is your point? Even if extra help wouldn't have changed the outcome, he still lied about them asking for it.
What do you mean what is your point? I just wrote down my point. The point is that the security requests were mostly about the embassy in Tripoli and not the facility that we're talking about, and that the White House was not informed about this. If Biden meant "we" as in "Obama, myself and the White House", his statement was perfectly accurate (in fact, it might even be accurate for the entire Obama administration if no security request was made for the facility in Bengazi - we'd have to look more into it. The politifact article bases its rating on "there" meaning "Lybia" instead of "Bengazi").
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
1. The security requests were mostly for the embassy in Tripoli, not the facility in Bengazi 2. Those security requests did not reach the White House but were dealt with by low- (and possibly mid-) level State Department employees.
Those poor ill-informed people in the White House were pretty quick to jump on the "evil hateful movie on youtube" bandwagon as a surety. Pardon me if amongst the numerous White House official positions on what happened, if I'm caused to doubt whether or not they heard about trouble over there in the months leading up to it and made the decision not to commit resources. Not that the UN Ambassador Susan Rice (yes, Obama nominee) was ridiculously off base when she said it
was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo, as a consequence of the video
Administration has given plenty of reasons to doubt that lax security on the anniversary of 9/11 was purely a low-level decision never reaching the President or VP in an intelligence briefing or communication from the state department.
Romney accused Vice President Joe Biden of “doubling down on denial” concerning security at the diplomatic post where the U.S. ambassador and three other Americans were killed. During the vice presidential debate Thursday, Biden said “we weren’t told” about the Benghazi consulate’s requests for additional security. Although a State Department official told Congress on Wednesday about the requests, the White House said Friday that Biden was speaking just for himself and for the president.
“The vice president directly contradicted the sworn testimony of State Department officials,” said Romney, who was eager to stoke a controversy that has flared periodically since the attack. “American citizens have a right to know just what’s going on. And we’re going to find out.”
I'd say it looks pretty fucking amazing considering what happened in 07/08.
What's amazing?
That government employment ever since 1950 has never decreased with only 2 exceptions: the 80s recession and under Obama (spikes due to census hiring are ignored).
The private sector is recovering strongly, stronger than under Bush in the 2000 recession, whereas government employment is falling due to state and local government austerity.
Wait a second. You need to clarify a couple points in this post.
For one, government employment has only decreased in two instances, but that's not by choice. Obama didn't say "I'm making sacrifices of public jobs for the greater good", just like Reagan didn't say that. Government employment decreased by necessity because tax revenues have dried up so much that the government has no choice but to trim jobs to salvage the budget. It's not a praiseworthy event, it's a measure of just how bad the recession was and how slow the recovery has been that tax revenue has not returned to pre-crisis levels.
And on that note, by what measure has the private sector recovered more strongly than Bush in the 2001 recession? Because the government should be measuring it by tax revenue, since the rest of the presidential discussion is moot unless it can get the taxes to pay for any of it.
On the first point, yes. There wasn't enough stimulus money given to state and local governments to retain public sector workers. But look at the other recessions (grey shaded areas). Every other recession, except the 80's one, didn't see a fall in public sector employment.
If I'm not mistaken the graph you previously posted shows employment since the start of presidential terms - not since the start of the recessions / recoveries. So it isn't apples to apples.
There was a recession at the start of both the Bush and Obama term. Or should I just replace the word "recession" with "presidency" in my above post?
No, the latest recession didn't start when Obama took office. According to the NBER the economy peaked in Dec. of '07 and if you look at BLS data employment started to tank in Feb. of '08. Conversely the NBER says that the economy peaked in Mar. of '01 for Bush and employment started to tank at that time too.
So, there's about a 1 year timing issue just using presidential terms.
He didn't say the recession started when Obama took office, he said there was a recession when he took office.
Yes, but there wasn't a recession when Bush first took office. When Bush first took office the economy was at its peak. When Obama took office the economy was far closer to its bottom than its peak. So it isn't apples to apples. When you show a graph of employment by term you show the entire downturn in the '01 recession but you do not show the entire downturn of the latest recession.
Can you stop nitpicking minor details that will change nothing? You can't change the fact that there is a upward trend under Bush and a downward trend under Obama for public sector employment to anything else by fudging with the dates.
In fact, looking at the start of the recession isn't even useful, because the recession started before Obama, so you can't blame Obama for what happened then. But I've done it anyway, and as I've said above, it can't possibly change anything. The conclusion is the same, public sector employment fell under Obama and rose under Bush, whereas private sector employment recovered stronger under Obama. Data is from FRED as always.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
On October 14 2012 05:06 sam!zdat wrote: Can we give up this idea that there is a meaningful correlation between who's president and the "state of the economy" (expressed, of course, as a one-dimensional value)?
There have been 21 major recession in the US. The first 18 happened in the first 150 years, and all of them ended in under 4 years from their peaks without any government help. When the stock market crashed in the 20's, unemployment spiked to 9.8%, and then 6 months later, it was down to 6%. Then the government passed a 20% tariff on all imports, and unemployed shot up to double digits, and didn't leave for the next decade. Then we had the Reagan recession, in which unemployment went back to relatively normal levels 4 years after its peak.
So we have 19 recessions that all had unemployment coming down from its peak in 4 or less years, often with double digit unemployment. We have a 20th where unemployment came down in 6 months, and then skyrocketed when the government decided to do something. And now we have today's unemployment. Given the history of recessions in this country, who do you think is to blame, and what "should" the unemployment rate be?
The answer is Bush, and every single republican and democrat that voted with him, and Obama, and every republican and democrat that voted with him.
Also note that presidents and other politicians aren't really empowered enough to create unemployment, but they can extended by about 15-20 years if you look at FDR.
(not that any of this is directed at you, just yours seems to be the latest post on this subject).
And the Great Depression was getting better until FDR pivoted to austerity in 1937, which turned a recovering economy into a double-dip recession. It was ended by the biggest fiscal stimulus ever -- WW2.
Last I checked, that's exactly Romney wants going to do.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
security assignments are important, but let's not think that it is the main content of foreign policy. the consequences of getting rid of gaddafi and the egypt guy are also up in the air right now.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
First of all, you don't even know if requests were made specifically about the Bengazi facility (it's very possible, but nobody so far in this thread seems to have posted evidence that this was the case). From the politifact article: "the number of guards at the Benghazi consulate when the attack occurred was at or near the number Nordstrom said were needed for that site". Second, Republicans are directly blaming Obama and Biden for decisions made by low-level Department of State employees who probably would be doing the exact same job if McCain and Sarah Palin were in office. I therefore find it perfectly normal for Biden to reply in the name of the White House, which the Republicans are blaming for the requests being denied. Finally, regarding what you call "a failed foreign policy", you have simply no idea what you're talking about.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
First of all, you don't even know if requests were made specifically about the Bengazi facility (it's very possible, but nobody so far in this thread seems to have posted evidence that this was the case). From the politifact article: "the number of guards at the Benghazi consulate when the attack occurred was at or near the number Nordstrom said were needed for that site". Second, Republicans are directly blaming Obama and Biden for decisions made by low-level Department of State employees who probably would be doing the exact same job if McCain and Sarah Palin were in office. I therefore find it perfectly normal for Biden to reply in the name of the White House, which the Republicans are blaming for the requests being denied. Finally, regarding what you call "a failed foreign policy", you have simply no idea what you're talking about.
I call a foreign policy that involves covering up terrorist attacks by blaming it on an anti-islamic video a failed one
Sept. 11: Despite anti-video demonstrations in Cairo, Benghazi is tranquil. According to U.S. diplomats, “everything is calm. There’s nothing unusual. There has been nothing unusual during the day at all outside. No protests all day.”
At 9:40 p.m. local time, however, gunfire and explosions rock the consulate.
Sept. 12: As these homicides become clear, Obama says, “We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others, but there is absolutely no justification for this type of senseless violence. None.” Obama then skips his daily intelligence briefing and jets to a Las Vegas fundraiser.
Sept. 13: “The United States government had absolutely nothing to do with this video,” Secretary of State Hillary Clinton declares. “We absolutely reject its content and message.”
Sept. 14: “The unrest we’ve seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims find offensive,” White House press secretary Jay Carney announces.
That day, as the murdered Americans’ remains reach Andrews Air Force Base, Clinton says: “We have seen rage and violence directed at American embassies over an awful Internet video that we had nothing to do with.”
Sept. 16: United Nations Ambassador Susan Rice calls the violence “a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video.”
Sept. 18: Obama tells comedian David Letterman that he rejects the “extremely offensive video directed at Muhammad and Islam.” Obama adds that “extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.”
Sept. 19: Team Obama abruptly changes tunes. National Counterterrorism Director Matthew Olsen informs the Senate Homeland Security Committee, “I would say yes, they were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy.”
Why would Team Obama essentially accuse a video of these murders, even as Lt. Col. Andrew Wood — leader of a 16-man, dedicated military unit withdrawn from Libya in August — called the hit “instantly recognizable” as terrorism?
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
First of all, you don't even know if requests were made specifically about the Bengazi facility (it's very possible, but nobody so far in this thread seems to have posted evidence that this was the case). From the politifact article: "the number of guards at the Benghazi consulate when the attack occurred was at or near the number Nordstrom said were needed for that site". Second, Republicans are directly blaming Obama and Biden for decisions made by low-level Department of State employees who probably would be doing the exact same job if McCain and Sarah Palin were in office. I therefore find it perfectly normal for Biden to reply in the name of the White House, which the Republicans are blaming for the requests being denied. Finally, regarding what you call "a failed foreign policy", you have simply no idea what you're talking about.
I call a foreign policy that involves covering up terrorist attacks by blaming it on an anti-islamic video a failed one
Except that's not what we were talking about, since we were talking about Biden saying "we didn't know" with regards to the security requests. Also, in case you didn't follow the news, that terrorists are responsible for the death of the ambassador doesn't change the fact that there were plenty of protests (and violence during those protests) at the same time and in the days that followed against the US in several Arab countries, notably because of the video. And you still don't understand what "foreign policy" means.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
Lol, I watch the thread for people like this. No bias here, boss.
New RNC Ad highlights how ridiculous Joe Biden's laughter was..it gave me a good laugh even though I don't find the current administrations actions very funny.
I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
First of all, you don't even know if requests were made specifically about the Bengazi facility (it's very possible, but nobody so far in this thread seems to have posted evidence that this was the case). From the politifact article: "the number of guards at the Benghazi consulate when the attack occurred was at or near the number Nordstrom said were needed for that site". Second, Republicans are directly blaming Obama and Biden for decisions made by low-level Department of State employees who probably would be doing the exact same job if McCain and Sarah Palin were in office. I therefore find it perfectly normal for Biden to reply in the name of the White House, which the Republicans are blaming for the requests being denied. Finally, regarding what you call "a failed foreign policy", you have simply no idea what you're talking about.
I call a foreign policy that involves covering up terrorist attacks by blaming it on an anti-islamic video a failed one
Except that's not what we were talking about, since we were talking about Biden saying "we didn't know" with regards to the security requests. Also, in case you didn't follow the news, that terrorists are responsible for the death of the ambassador doesn't change the fact that there were plenty of protests (and violence during those protests) at the same time and in the days that followed against the US in several Arab countries, notably because of the video. And you still don't understand what "foreign policy" means.
Actually what we are talking about is Joe Biden lying as a rebuttal to all the people crying "Lyin Ryan" as if the Obama administration is somehow about pure truth telling and "facts".
On October 14 2012 02:38 sc2superfan101 wrote: [quote] I think this is going to be a really effective add. watching the debate, I didn't even realize that it was that bad; it's pretty clear that either 1) Biden is laughing at everything incredulously so as to create the image of Ryan being too ridiculous even to argue with, or 2) he seriously thinks all that stuff is funny.
I'm gonna channel Paul Ryan here real quick:
"The problem, Mr. Vice-President, is that the American people don't find lackluster job growth and dishonesty to be all that funny."
I agree, I think people will be very shocked at how hilarious all of this seems to Biden.
On October 14 2012 01:49 paralleluniverse wrote:
He's laughing at Ryan and his lies, not laughing at the issues.
I also don't recall you complaining about his laughing during the debate.
Because Biden only tells the truth?
"We weren't told they wanted more security " for diplomatic facilities in Libya. BULL SHIT.
When we were accusing Romney and Ryan of lying in the debates, you guys didn't seem to want to talk about the truth back then, only the optics.
Oh, so you suddenly want to talk about the truth now?
Before the debates, I haven't seen team Republican in this thread arguing that Romney won't give tax cuts to rich people or that Romney is going to cover preexisting conditions. Since then, I've seen some of you guys parroting these new campaign lies as if they always were.
For example, the latter is disgraceful. Romney's plan doesn't cover preexisting conditions. It's only if you have continuous coverage, which is the same as the law before Obamacare, it's not what is meant and understood by "covering preexisting conditions", the way Obamacare does. So people could die and be denied medical treatment, if they voted for Romney believing his plan covers preexisting conditions.
People could die because of this Romney lie. That's how shameful and shocking this lie is.
Do you honestly and seriously believe that Biden is laughing at the issues as that ad alleges?
Also, there's no evidence that requests for extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. Is it even standard protocol that the president needs to approve requests for extra embassy security?
There doesn't need to be evidence that the extra security at the Libyan embassy made it to Biden's or Obama's desk. If it isn't standard protocol for the president needing to approve those requests, why would he even say "we never knew about that"? That sounds like a pretty irrelevant thing to say if it isn't standard protocol. "We didn't know about those things that don't come to the execute desk." No fucking shit? Your administration still knows asshole.
"It's possible that Biden and Obama were unaware of that request. Still, it was made in the State Department, which is part of the Obama administration. Even if it didn't make its way up through the bureaucracy, a request was made."
Biden said: "We weren't told they wanted more security there."
The state department was told, as documented in the recent hearing.
But there's nothing to suggest Biden and Obama were told, or that it is normal procedure that they should be told.
Why didn't he say "Our State Department officials were told, but it never reached us"? Why didn't he say "that kind of information doesn't reach the President or myself normally"? Simply saying "we didn't know" is the most dishonest and disgusting answer for a failed foreign policy.
First of all, you don't even know if requests were made specifically about the Bengazi facility (it's very possible, but nobody so far in this thread seems to have posted evidence that this was the case). From the politifact article: "the number of guards at the Benghazi consulate when the attack occurred was at or near the number Nordstrom said were needed for that site". Second, Republicans are directly blaming Obama and Biden for decisions made by low-level Department of State employees who probably would be doing the exact same job if McCain and Sarah Palin were in office. I therefore find it perfectly normal for Biden to reply in the name of the White House, which the Republicans are blaming for the requests being denied. Finally, regarding what you call "a failed foreign policy", you have simply no idea what you're talking about.
I call a foreign policy that involves covering up terrorist attacks by blaming it on an anti-islamic video a failed one
Except that's not what we were talking about, since we were talking about Biden saying "we didn't know" with regards to the security requests. Also, in case you didn't follow the news, that terrorists are responsible for the death of the ambassador doesn't change the fact that there were plenty of protests (and violence during those protests) at the same time and in the days that followed against the US in several Arab countries, notably because of the video. And you still don't understand what "foreign policy" means.
Actually what we are talking about is Joe Biden lying as a rebuttal to all the people crying "Lyin Ryan" as if the Obama administration is somehow about pure truth telling and "facts".
Ryan said almost nothing accurately. People are used to misinformation and half-truths by politicians, but literally everything Ryan was saying was absolute bullshit.
And he was planning on spewing out bullshit. That was his strategy going into the debate. He went on the news beforehand saying that "Well, I think their strategy is just going to be to call us liars." Why would you say that if you weren't planning on lying your ass off completely?
And you're defending him. It's absolutely astonishing.
EPT
It was pretty funny how little he could say.![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/x8qba.png)
![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/88KhF.png)
