"The Day Obama Became Toxic: After Libya, We Cannot Trust Him"

When the dust settles years from now....many politicians will have to take Asylum in other countries...that's a fact!!!

More Conservative non-sense. You can cry all the way to Nov 6th but you know Obama is going to win. Republicans best Candidate couldn't beat Obama. Let that sink in.

I have never trusted him either...the difference now is that he is showing everyone CLEARLY who he is...

When someone SHOWS us who they are, to ignore them shows ignorance.

why is more than 50% of the article posted?

You guys have surrounded yourselves in this little Obama hatred bubble and have insulated yourselves from the real world to the point you actually think Obama is loosing. On Nov 7th when Obama is still President you will all be shocked, saying "How did this happen". The rest of the Country is paying attention to other news sources other than Conservative rantings and knows that Obama is out best choice. Your Conservative lies are being seen for what they are. If you just took this Forum and let it vote, Romney would win in a landslide. Now look at the latest polls. Does this not tell you something?

So, a site known for birther lunatics, who have said they cannot trust Obama since day 1 now says it is just after Libya they can't trust him?

Fucking morons. You really like your shit on a stick don't you?

I'm not sure he is winning or losing, but you are right: their insulated world view is quite clear.

What it tells me is that Obamatards are like co-dependents who stay with abusive partners, they know that they are being abused and used..but they love him and want him no matter what he does to them....

I have always believed that to get at the truth you must look at all news sources and then make your own decisions. If you think I only read and look at conservative new sources you are wrong...I don't fit in the box you have been brainwashed to put me .

You are so in love with this man, he is a drug..you don't care if it's bad for you... You just have to have it..

stfu..

Yes it's a tendency in our recent Presidents.

FDR let Pearl Harbor happen as a pretext to get into WWII.

W's administration let 9/11/01 happen (our Air Force was even specially grounded!) as a pretext to enter the Middle East and build up an anti-terror bureaucracy.

Now we hear O let 9/11/12 happen. Wonder what it's a pretext for? I guess for retaking Libya, which is still largely controlled by Gaddafi loyalists. We need an excuse to put boots on the ground there, now we've got it.

But it's no excuse, these are ALL treasonous episodes and deserve at the least that the incumbent be removed from office. We've got to keep trying to get control of the US government until we succeed.

It's not. OP posted just a few sentences out of most of the sections.

It doesn't matter who is winning or losing, same result, same arrogance by political leaders to do as they wish, even if it's against the will of the people. There is only one loser.....the people. All the politicians are winners. All taken care of for life, protected for life with the master elite military or police force. All this fuck shit posturing who is gonna win in November is all a worthless superficial game to keep everyone entertained. I'm NOT entertained in the least. I'd rather watch Sesame Street than this mindless psych Op!

Last Edited by ****SUPERFLY**** on 09/17/2012 10:39 AM

Corporations are formal business associations ultimately owned by human shareholders, and are in effect agents working on behalf of those shareholders. The shareholders exchanged their wealth, including the right to speak on its behalf, to the association. An association has the Constitutionally guaranteed freeom to speak that originates with the human shareholders. Associations are required to obey laws intended for individuals, and must pay taxes. For these reasons, corporations are considered legal(ly created) people.

The apparent question is whether assocations should have free speech. The better question is, "on what grounds should they be denied free speech." Clearly, there is no reason.

Corporations are [legally created] people too.

The article is guilty of overreaching:

Four hundred Muslim radicals stormed the US Embassy in Libya and killed several Americans, including Ambassador Christopher Stevens.

erm, no. They stormed a safe-house in Benghazi that they knew was used by Americans. Safe-houses are not entitled to diplomatic protection, which may be why we weren't guarding it. We don't even know that the "Muslim radicals" knew Stevens was there.

Still that doesn't excuse Obama letting it happen.

A corporation, through limited liability, allows its owners to act and speak in a very strong way. Usually a man is responsible for his actions, but when his corporation acts on his behalf, he is not responsible. If there's a problem, the worst that happens is that the corporation goes bankrupt.

Also the corporation accumulates the assets of many, so it's very strong. And it has no human needs (things like food, shelter, caring for its children) so it can be inhuman.

These are very good reasons to clamp down on what corporations can do.

Basically I think both candidates this time are shitheads.

I'll vote for Romney, but he's a shithead too.

Wrong, the shareholders didn't "exchange their ... right to speak ..." to the association. They RETAINED their full right to speak, and IN ADDITION their corporation has an additional right to speak.

Unless you're thinking of speech in purely dollar terms, which you probably are, in which case your statement makes sense.

But then the corporation has the unfair, potentially very destructive advantage of limited liability. It can do really bad things on the owners' behalf, and the owners' assets not in the corporation are legally protected.

We are witnessing the take down of America from within. He helped bring the Muslim Brotherhood to power in Egypt. They proceeded to sack the pro-US officers from the military. That very military is now moving artillery to the Israeli border. He brought radicals to power in Libya, who then proceed to attack and kill our ambassador, reportedly after sodomizing him.

Meanwhile Obama flies to Vegas to schmooze with celebs and raise $, missing his intel briefings on a regular basis. All of this is reported in the press and is established fact. The liberal response, when this is pointed out, is Bush, Bush, Bush. Or there's no difference between the parties they are all blah blah blah.

In other words, there is no attempt at rebuttal, because no rebuttal is possible. If the American people elect this man again they will get what they deserve. A collapsed economic system, and a world at war. Mark my words.

Try all the propaganda you want with Obama. He will get re elected.

fixed

Ah yes. Deflect attention to Bush when the Obamatards can't defend the actions of their fuhrer.

Correction, Karl Rove is the Fuhrer...but even then, they are not as disgusting as the fucking Nazi's.

Nice deflection...call Obama a fascist when you can't explain away the beginning of the end of civil rights due to the Republican party.

Or be out on public display like a certain Italian dictator we once knew. TO koffee, OP, FANTASTIC thread , great read, so glad there are people like you who correlate all this into data the simple man can digest, then start simmering, because anybody with common sense should be mad.

Last Edited by M*walk on 09/17/2012 12:42 PM

AND REMEMBER TO FIGHT AMONGST YOURSELVES

Baron Rotschild will be proud

:rap:

"The fact that anyone, for any reason, has any trust in any politician or Government is beyond reason.

Your Government has a 220 year track record of screwing over its own people and has openly declared and conducted war on its own people or others since its inception."

Times 16 trillion...

If Obama nuked Iran, The Mainstream US Media would be immediately telling us all how "Humanitarian!" it was that Obama nuked them, and to imagine the suffering if he hadn't.

NOTHING MATTERS BUT GETTING OBAMA RELECTED, to them.