Barack Obama Is A Liar

Either that or the fact that in the interim she has served as Secretary of State, giving her experience on the world stage that exceeds what Obama or Bill had before they became president. If one is to look at resumes alone without the politics of personalities and slander one will find Hillary's resume more impressive than any of the other presidential aspirants in this election cycle.

 

Here's the thing about experience: it's generally assumed that doing something for a long time means you're good at it.

Hillary has a lot of experience at doing things poorly.

Hillary was not even qualified for the position of Secretary of State, when she had handed to her as a consolation prize until it was her "turn" to be POTUS.

Name a positive accomplishment on the world stage as the SoS that she had.

 

Did your teacher also break you up from posting arguments you cannot defend? No, she or he did not. For references refer back to post #51.

 

Please.

Every person on some level is a liar. If you're in business you're definitely a liar and we all know it. If you're involved with anything that involves dealing with people and deriving an income via those dealings then you're going to have to learn to lie or you're not going to derive an income for very long.

So stop being silly. You and I are just as much liars as any politician just on smaller, more insignificant scale.

 

Hmm..., Well the truth about Benghazi is finally starting to see the light. It's coming to light that Obama and Hillary were heavily involved in an International Fast and Furious on steroids. They used Intelligence agencies and the State Department to coordinate shipments to Syrian terrorists. Newly released documents show that US intelligence agencies were fully aware that weapons were moving from the Islamic terror stronghold in Libya to Syria before the attack on the Benghazi compound on September 11, 2012. The documents also contradict Hussein Obama’s claim that the rise of the Islamic State came as a surprise to the administration. Documents “show a serious disconnect between what the administration said and what was known by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA).”

A Defense Department document from the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), [http://www.judicialwatch.org/document-archive/pgs-394-398-396-from-jw-v-dod-and-state-14-812/] dated September 12, 2012, the day after the Benghazi attack, details that the attack on the compound had been carefully planned by the BOCAR terrorist group “to kill as many Americans as possible.” The document was sent to then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Obama White House National Security Council. The heavily redacted Defense Department “information report” says that the attack on the Benghazi facility “was planned and executed by The Brigades of the Captive Omar Abdul Rahman (BCOAR).” The group subscribes to “AQ ideologies:”​

BENGHAZI—WAS THIS A UNITED STATES GUNRUNNING …
https://counterjihadreport.com/2012...tes-gunrunning-operation-to-al-qaida-jihadis/
Is the Obama Administration running guns into other Jihadist ... But that they let out mission go ... “BENGHAZI—WAS THIS A UNITED STATES GUNRUNNING …

 

Dude...loosen the tin foil hat. It's gotta be causing you pain.

 

Pass the torch!

 

At least he recognizes the problems we face and how to fix them. All Mrs. Bill Clinton wants to do
is more of the failed policies the current president has tried.

To answer your question, Trump is the only "better" we've got.

 

It would not matter even if Trump was not a member of the establishment. He comes with a way too much baggage = The GOP.

Voting for Trump is a vote for Red and a vote for Red is a vote for maintaining the status quo as described in my previous post.

 

Good post. I think you have made some very good points. I wish I had time to dignify it with a proper response. So I am going to briefly say that while you have made some astute observations, I don't agree that the issue of the possibility of nuclear war between the US and Russia should be brushed aside. The case can be made that the process has already started, and its just a matter of whether or not we are going to travel further down that road. To support this notion, I would put forward that the US and Russia are currently indirectly engaged in violent armed with each other in two very critical hot spots, Ukraine and Syria. In Ukraine Russia is covertly engaged in providing assistance to ethnic Russians in the east. They are providing soldiers, some of whom have lost their lives, and weapons. The US is assisting the Ukrainian government that is based in Kiev by providing military advisors and non-lethal aid. In Syria, the Russian military has directly intervened to prevent the collapse of the Assad government. The US is supplying weapons to elements that oppose Assad.

As far as Ukraine is concerned, it is a vital interest for Russia. They simply cannot lose there. The problem is that there are powerful forces in the US political/military/financial establishment that feels that Russia's support for the separatists constitutes a threat to the post WWII world order that the US has established. To support this notion, consider that Evelyn Farkas, who supposedly was the top pentagon official overseeing military relations with Russia and Ukraine, recently resigned after Obama met with Putin on the sidelines of a meeting of the UN General Assembly. Here's part of her testimony to Congress

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/09/pro-defense-farkas-wrightewing-214223

To make a long story short, it is elements like this within the establishment that feel that the US should take more forceful action in Ukraine. One thing that they advocate is providing lethal aid to Ukraine. The thing is this, the US can do one of two things with regards to Ukraine, it can either try to accommodate Russia's security concerns by giving the regions in eastern Ukraine autonomy, accepting Russia's annexation of Crimea, along with giving a pledge of no NATO for Ukraine in return for Russia's pledge to stay out of Ukraine. Or it can choose to keep the armed struggle going on by supporting the government based in Kiev. If Hillary is elected, it is likely that the latter route will be chosen. If that is the case, the conflict will intensify, because as I said, Russia cannot lose there. It may come to the point of the Russia military directly going into the eastern Ukraine. At that point Hillary will come under pressure to possibly directly intervene and provide defense of Kiev to prevent the government from collapsing. If that takes place, then the possibility for direct conflict between the US and Russia will be on the table. That's one scenario with regards to Ukraine. Much can be said about the matter, and you really can't go into it in depth in a forum post.

With regards to Syria, Clinton is almost certain to send a sizeable amount of US troops into Iraq to confront ISIS. From there they will press on into Syria. Russia has dug in its heels in Syria, and as a result there will be the possibility of the two forces coming into conflict. I made that very brief, but I wanted to give an idea.

Now you can say that is all speculation, and that is true. However, what is not speculation is the fact that the US and Russia are on opposite ends of the armed conflict that is taking place in both Ukraine and Syria. It is also a fact that there are powerful elements in the US that want the US to take stronger, more direct action in both places. It is also a fact that Hillary Clinton is sympathetic to those elements. Therefore such scenarios are a real possibility, and therefore the potential for nuclear conflict between Russia and the US in a Clinton administration is real concern.

Again, I apologize for being so brief, but I really don't have time to treat the subject properly. Not only that but this venue cannot properly accomodate all that needs to be said on that subject.

- - - Updated - - -

Now that was an interesting response. Very talented indeed! I am impressed!

 

In Wesley Clark's case, I disagree with you. His military career has given him the necessary experience that is needed at this juncture of US history to deal with the complex foreign policy questions related to how and when to use military force that face the US today.

 

There is no need to refer back. You had nothing to add then, so its no point in going back and looking at nothing again.

 

I am going to point out again that Obama knows very well that as president he has to carefully chose his words. Those words were carefully chosen for maximum political effect. It was deliberate deceit.

 

^This type of post, folks, is the sign of a desperate person looking for a nothing to be angry about

 

Oh really? WOW! That must be some good stuff you are smoking!

 

Oh, Jesus, little boy. Go out and find something legitimate to be pissed about. Yours is the immature rant of a third grader.

 

Jesus???

WOW! You sound like one of those old black ladies that would sit in church and fan themselves with those hand fans when I was a boy! Gimme that old time religion!

 

Your mommy told you that you were smart and could accomplish anything. Obviously, your mommy was a liar.

 

Lafarge also has close ties to Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. Apart from being a regular donor to the Clinton Foundation, Clinton herself was a director of Lafarge in the early 1990s, and did legal work for the firm in the 1980s. During her connection to Lafarge, the firm was implicated in facilitating a CIA-backed covert arms export network to Saddam Hussein. Then there's the millions donated to the Clinton Foundation and Hillary's involvement in the overthrow and assassination of Gaddafi. What was Ambassador Stevens doing meeting with the Turkish Consul just before he was killed? What was Hillary's involvement in the transfer of guns to Syria? I guess having the wool pulled over one's eyes by their Progressive Marxist leaders is worse than being accused of wearing tin foil hats.

Saudi Arabia Among Biggest Donors to Clinton Foundation ...
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2008/12/18/saudi-arabia-biggest-donors-clinton-foundation.html
Dec 18, 2008 · Bill Clinton's foundation disclosed the names of its ... Kuwait, Qatar , Brunei, Oman, ... The top ranks of Clinton's donor list are heavy with longtime ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

CIA Gun-running, Qatar-Libya-Syria. ...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/cia-gun-running-qatar-libya-syria/5345464
CIA Gun-running, Qatar-Libya ... secretly helping to move surface-to-air missiles out of Libya, through Turkey, ... been allowed to flow into Turkey from Qatar, ...

~~~~~~~~~~~~​

Former Special Forces Commander: Was U.S. Running Guns …
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article...us-running-guns-syrian-rebels-benghazi-cia-no
Video embedded · Former Special Forces Commander: Was U.S. Running Guns ... now funneling guns to the rebel forces in Syria, ... the State Department’s Special …

Hillary Clinton Approved Delivering Libya’s Sarin Gas to Syrian Rebels...
http://www.globalresearch.ca/hillar...in-gas-to-syrian-rebels-seymour-hersh/5522647
Hillary Clinton Approved Delivering ... was reached between the Obama Administration ... build through Syria the Qatar-Turkey Gas Pipeline that the ...
... a secret agreement in 2012 was reached between the Obama Administration and the leaders of Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar, to set up a Sarin gas attack and blame it on Assad so that the US could invade and overthrow Assad. the then-US-Secretary-of-State’s role in the Benghazi Libya US consulate’s operation to collect weapons from Libyan stockpiles and send them through Turkey into Syria for a set-up Sarin-gas attack, to be blamed on Assad in order to ‘justify’ the US invading Syria, as the US had invaded Libya to eliminate Gaddafi.

 

Speaking of, here's one of my favorite hymns from when I was a boy.

All glories to the Almighty God, my strength and my redeemer!!!!

[video=youtube;uSHDWj2au_o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uSHDWj2au_o[/video]

 

WOW! I hadn't heard that one in a while! It's worth posting those lyrics!



Time is filled with swift transition,
Naught of earth unmoved can stand,
Build your hopes on things eternal,
Hold to God’s unchanging hand.

Refrain:
Hold to God’s unchanging hand,
Hold to God’s unchanging hand;
Build your hopes on things eternal,
Hold to God’s unchanging hand.

Trust in Him who will not leave you,
Whatsoever years may bring,
If by earthly friends forsaken
Still more closely to Him cling.

Covet not this world’s vain riches
That so rapidly decay,
Seek to gain the heav’nly treasures,
They will never pass away.

When your journey is completed,
If to God you have been true,
Fair and bright the home in glory
Your enraptured soul will view.

Yes my Lord!! Indeed you are the Most High!! I bow down to your feet again, again and again!!!!

 

WOW! That made me so happy hearing that and reminding me of church when I was a boy, that I found this gem. I used to play organ in church, so this really gets me going!!!

[video=youtube;kg5Kn12L_EY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kg5Kn12L_EY[/video]

 

How do you know he's going to fix them when he doesn't tell us how?

 

When I was a boy, black folks used to actually sing this song like this, one person would lead, and then the congregation would repeat.

[video=youtube;fpgJiXJFh9U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fpgJiXJFh9U[/video]