Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Political discussion here. Any reasonable opinion is welcome, but due to the sensitive nature of the topic area, please be nice and respectful to others. No flaming or trolling, please. And please keep political commentary out of the other board areas and confine it to this area. Thanks!
Post Reply
User avatar
Dan H
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:10 pm

Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by Dan H »

http://nypost.com/2014/10/25/former-cbs ... cts-obama/

I look forward to the next Republican President so that our media will once again begin holding politicians accountable.

User avatar
SwingMan
Posts: 1151
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 3:08 pm
Location: Hell's Outhouse - a.k.a. Buckeye, Az.
Contact:

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by SwingMan »

Saw that late last night.

Any modern leftist who believes the mainstream media is "against them" needs to check themselves - preferably into the nearest mental treatment center due to severe delusionis-acutis.....

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3966
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:25 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by SDC »

the media protects obama and the IRS targets the tea party... sheesh.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3966
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:25 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by SDC »

if the govt can plant evidence in sharyl attkisson's computer...

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2 ... f-2014.php

User avatar
Mori Chu
Posts: 20875
Joined: Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:05 am

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by Mori Chu »

I really don't think the whole "Benghazi" thing will gain any traction. I don't see why the Republicans keep bringing it up. It had its cycle in the media, people had their reactions, and we move on.

User avatar
SDC
Posts: 3966
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2014 9:25 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by SDC »

Mori Chu wrote:I really don't think the whole "Benghazi" thing will gain any traction. I don't see why the Republicans keep bringing it up. []It had its cycle in the media, people had their reactions, and we move on.[/b]
the IRS scandal is under the same boat too, even though i think this one's legit.

User avatar
Dan H
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by Dan H »

Mori Chu wrote:I really don't think the whole "Benghazi" thing will gain any traction. I don't see why the Republicans keep bringing it up. It had its cycle in the media, people had their reactions, and we move on.
Sad to say it but it probably only hit's home with people in military families. One of the keystones has always been that we don't leave anyone behind.

User avatar
Nodack
Posts: 8517
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 6:50 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by Nodack »

I am not buying into the whole Benghazi thing. To me it was a tragedy. To Republicans it is a political weapon and nothing more imo. They are distraught over Americans being killed by terrorists in Benghazi? There were dozens of attacks on US embassies under Bush with scores of Americans killed. There were no investigations. No outrage that we didn't stop it. We started a war with Iraq based on lies and fabrications in a failed attempt to steal their oil. We killed hundreds of thousands, sacrificed thousands of American soldiers and spent trillions. Where was the outrage? Not a peep. Now I am supposed to buy into the Benghazi outrage?

Secret plans for Iraq's oil
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/4354269.stm

Why the war in Iraq was fought for big oil
http://www.cnn.com/2013/03/19/opinion/i ... il-juhasz/

User avatar
Dan H
Posts: 892
Joined: Thu Jul 24, 2014 12:10 pm

Re: Sharyl Attkisson is an unreasonable woman.

Post by Dan H »

Hey, Nodack in case you missed the NYT admitted a couple of weeks back that we did indeed find WMD's in Iraq. Just in time for Hilary 2016. :lol:

The Dems were in charge of both branches of Congress in the middle of the war, they had plenty of time to do investigations - why didn't they? Harry Reid - Senate Majority Leader since 2005. Nancy Pelosi, House Speaker from January 2007 on. Where were the articles of impeachment?

You're not entirely wrong that it was the wrong war at the wrong time - I think we'd have been better off focusing on Afghanistan, but the whole 'steal their oil', 'killed hundreds of thousands' stuff is a bit out there and based on a lot of tinfoil hat stuff. My brother did two tours over there, was disabled out of the military as a result (and, surprise surprise, has been screwed over royally with VA delays), and they bent over backward to reduce collateral damage.

We were facing an enemy that would put rocket launchers in the hands of children to point at convoys as they drove by. And just around the corner, conveniently waiting, would be camera crews. The opposition was very media savvy and worked hand-in-glove with Al Jazeera. This happened multiple times to my brother.

You're using Western ethics to define a conflict with people that would pack a car full of explosives, sit their children on top of it, then drive full speed at a coalition checkpoint. Then when the checkpoint inevitably opened fire to defend themselves, scream in the press about the excessive force. Spare me. We care more about their children than they seem to, apparently. We don't use our children as weapons: http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6889106/ns/wo ... ped-child/

In the end though, the really big irony is, if you're going to bring up Iraq, there was authorization to use force in Iraq, duly voted on by Congress. One of the issues with Benghazi of course, was that there WAS no such authorization. And the guy who attacked Bush for going to war with authorization sang a completely different tune when he was running the show:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/1 ... 77736.html

Post Reply