When Will Fox and the Right-wingers Stop Politicizing the Deaths of 4 Americans?

It's also lessened the need for assistance. Most of those abortions are by the poor and lower-middle-class. Assuming all abortions are halted, the need for assistance would rise. Your party's policies don't want to provide that assistance.

Look, it's admirable of you to care about the unborn, and I commend you for that. I also know you care for children and don't really mind assisting them as needed. What I don't like is the reversal you have towards those kids when they turn 18. I understand it, as in "personal responsibility", but not all people are capable of succeeding in a minute after 18 years of hell. Not all people are the same or have the same abilities. In a better economic climate, where jobs are easier to find, more of those 18 year-olds can succeed. That isn't the case today. Jobs are scarce, and those young adults are having a hard time...especially when veterans and older unemployed adults are willing to take the more menial, low-paying jobs...as is happening now.

 

You're referring to China's euthanasia programs right?

 

I borrowed a lot to finance the finishing of my home (I painted everything, stained and varnished all the exposed wood, and installed all the trim, bought a stove, refrigerator, couch, beds, carpeting, etc...paying for it with Credit), but I had work and paid it off within ten years or so. Good thing I was aggressive in paying it off though, as a few months after I did, my job vaporized. If that had happened even a year before, I'd have been @#$%^&.

 

It sounds like you made a nice little nest.

 

It is not debt, in itself, that I am centered on. It is the rate of debt we are accumulating and how it has changed in a mere decade that is what I think should alarm anyone of any party. It is completely uncharted waters with no sign of land.

 

I believe that the vast majority of people are responsible with their finances. A few get in trouble but that is hardly unusual. We've probably all been there at one time or another but we live in a consumer oriented society. It's actually kind of funny that we aren't in worse shape individually than we are given what we are exposed to by this country's marketing machine.
The point is that you can't paint everyone or even overestimate the number of irresponsible consumers and make any sense at all. Most of us do just fine with our finances and others are dragged down with huge unexpected medical bills, economic downturns, a family crisis like divorce or death, and yes there some that just can't handle living within their means especially young people.
Then there are market forces on a global level that none of us have any control over. No matter how hard we work, how good we are with our finances, there are just economic shifts that will bring some people down. I've met people that have done everything right and still lost everything and I've also met people that have frittered away and piss away everything that was given to them. At the end of the day it just doesn't make any sense to treat both these types of people with equal disdain and lump them together as if there is no difference. From a financial perspective, they are both in the same place at the end of the day having lost everything but how they got there merits a closer look that most self-righteous idiots are willing to bother with.

 

Just a quick trip back to the original subject here.

When Will Fox and the Right-wingers Stop Politicizing the Deaths of 4 Americans?

With all due respect to those that lost their lives and their families there was a VERY interesting interview on the Ed Show recently.

Mr. Schultz interviewed the Republican Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson. A man who is obviously not happy with the direction the Republican party has taken.

In the interview Col. Wilkerson pointed out that more diplomats get killed than Generals.
Why? - because they work in dangerous territory. It's that simple.

 

Clearly, with all the attacks on Clinton, Obama, Rice that have been found to be nonsense, the only conclusion you can draw is the that Right is looking for anything to pin on the current administration. Taking that, it is only logical to conclude that the Right sees the deaths of these Americans as a political opportunity period! Romney said as much towards the end of the campaign.
Any time that there are deaths of innocent Americans abroad we need to investigate and learn what we can and if possible bring those responsible to justice. Starting an investigation by attacking your own side is a conclusion looking for a question and begs the question, what is the motivation for concluding responsibility before the facts have even been ascertained? Political? Oh yeah!!!

 

So, during the debates, BO took exception to Romney's statement that the admin refused to call the attack a "terror attack". BO argued that he called the 9/11 attack a "terror attack" the very next day (the infamous Rose Garden address). Can we all agree these are undisputed facts?

My question is...why, then, was Rice & other admin officials claiming- for days/weeks afterward- that the attack was not a terrorist attack? Why did they blame a months-old Youtube video & call it a "grassroots" protest?

If BO knew it was a terrorist attack on 9/12 as he stated why was his admin denying it for weeks following?

One of 'em is lying and that's the basis for the questions being posed & the ensuing suspection!

 

Are you too thick to know what an evolving situation is? You want so badly to believe that this administration is lying about something, anything, anything at all, that you jump all over anything even stuff that came out in less than 24 hours after the attack. Have you completely forgotten Romney taking a mouth full of foot by making a statement while our diplomats were being killed? Have you learned nothing? Of course you haven't and with Fox pumping you full of nonsense conspiracy theories, what else do you really need to consider? You are such a Right-wing tool.

 

Yep...(makes sound of airplane diving full throttle towards the ground)...Five bucks says we'll all beat the Emergency Response Team to the crash site...considering we're all on the plane lol

(tightens seat belt) @#$% it, let's do this thing!

 

An "evolving situation", huh? More like the Keystone Cops & a comedy of errors.

Are you claiming the administration wasn't convinced the attack was a terrorist attack...in spite of preceding events & the timing?

Either you are stupid enough to believe that or you are advoancing a story you know is a flat out lie. Which is it?

 

What I think is that you and the Right-wing entertainment establishment have the ability to ignore the mountain of foreign policy successes this administration has had in the last 4 years and try to equate Obama with the mountain of foreign policy blunders of the previous administration. There I no comparison. Obama is ten thousand times more competent than any of the idiots on the Right. The Repukes like to paint themselves as the foreign policy experts but clearly no one buys that crap anymore. No matter how much you as a mouthpiece for Fox try and gin up a controversy by repeating nonsense over and over, you just end up looking like fools.

 

Sooo...by not answering the question & switching to a tired old "Bush was worse" argument, can I assume you see the stupidty is defending BO in this Libya debacle? That's what I thought.

 

I find the lie thing sort of funny. What the situation was, is, or will eventually end up as has yet to be determined but that hasn't stopped a conclusion from already being drawn by those only interested in partisan politics and not really interested in he truth as they seem to claim. Although it certainly hasn't been shown that anything could have been gained from an administration lie, the accusation of lying seems to be the real goal and truth the real casualty. If the truth be told, this witch hunt has nothing to do with either truth or a lie of any kind. It is just a means to a very political end. That is why you find no reputable news sources crawling down this rabbit hole 24/7.

 

During the debates, BO claimed he called the 9/11 attack a "terrorist attack" as early as the next day yet Susan Rice & Jay Carney made their rounds the following week insisting is wasn't a terrorist attack. The administration (even after BO claims he knew it was a "terrorist attack") told the world it was a grass root protest, turned violent, due to a Youtube video even though real time video & audio was streamed into the WH!
Real time video! Real time audio! testimony from people on the scene! Obama's claim that he knew it was a "terrorist attack" on 9/12...why is there any need whatsover for an "evolving" situation defense from the admin? Romney seemed to know immediately that it was a terrorist attack.
BO did nothing to protect these US citizens despite the fact there had been previous attacks & previous warnings (not to mention the date kinda stands out!)...that is the reason for the cover-up, just a case of CYA.

 

Honestly, your party's cries of "Wolf!" get them what they deserve, ridicule. IF your party ever has a valid point, there's not going to be a legitimately interested person left to hear it out because of all the constant BS.

 

Even the OP claimed it was because of a YouTube video and some religious guy. All wrong. Must have been getting his "news" from MSNBC or the NY Times. My question is still, "Why weren't defenders sent at the moment the administration knew the consulate was under attack"?