Married to a mother just a few years younger, and responsible for email shit she can’t be bothered with. One cannot imagine the shit an email server can accumulate. I need to wade through tons of potentially, but not really, useful shit. In the mean time I’m TEN FUCKING THOUSAND posts behind regarding the Tandy Model 100 six inches from my foot.
Do any of these jackasses ever check their email, themselves?
The OP asked specifically:
Two answers from Clothahump were:
However, he has never come back to discuss some uncomfortable facts:
-Previous Republican presidents more than doubled the debt, while Obama has raised it 1.7 times.
-However terrible Benghazi was, Clinton was not found to shoulder the blame in multiple investigations run by Republican partisans - people who admitted publicly that the only reason to run these investigations was to get Clinton.
Fostering Islamic extremist movements was helpful for American interests at the time, namely for fighting communism and nationalism.
The Americans had nothing to do with Khomeni, and the Shia islamic reaction.
You confuse this with the Afghanistan.
if you want to understand how clothahump, etc, look at the world this week’s This American Life includes Ira talking to his Uncle, who gets his news from Fox.
Uncle has no idea about anything he is so brainwashed - it’s really sad. and dangerous.
Obama was never really in law school (what the hell?), immigration is a horrible flood of people growing, overwhelming our healthcare system (because it was fine before, right?) - and, of course, Hillary Clinton has been trying to hide emails but is about to be arrested by the FBI or NYPD or someone.
alternate reality, totally.
where lies are fine as long as they sound like want you want to believe. and facts? you just have to say “I don’t believe that”.
or, like Clothy, ignore them. (see post #222)
The outright lying by political leaders has now become completely over the top. For example, just yesterday, a Trump protester interrupted Obama at a rally for Clinton. What did Obama do? He told the crowd to stop booing, and then said:
This is factual. It was recorded. It is in the public record.
Now, what did Mr. Trump say about this event?
This is what Trump said. In public. It is recorded. It is in the public record.
Trump was lying here. Completely. Utterly. He made up an entirely different reality. And his supporters believe it without compunction. Even if you showed them a video of Obama doing the exact opposite, it would not change their minds.
What on earth is the psychology behind this? Why can a leader say things that are completely, unequivocally, 100% false, and have supporters believe him without question? It’s baffling.
I made the assumption in error. I thought you were arguing as the OP was. Sorry.
Quite a few. But when the threshold on what constitutes as a disaster is being set so high, that number drops considerably. Down to only a couple with a couple of if’s and but’s.
Which is the point I was trying to make - if you’re arguing the list of Democrat disasters (and it actually has some items in there) then that’s a different argument than the Democrats have never created a disaster. Those are two distinct arguments. Not one in the same as the OP is lamely playing. Pick a side - incapable of a disaster or not.
In terms of the ACA I’d say sure that was a disaster. Big time.
Problem is, the OP and many arguing with him/her wouldn’t agree that that’s a disaster. Nothing is that a Democrat has done. Show us! See? Nothing!
Lame.
Weed. Which I should back off on because I don’t understand a thing on what you’re on about above.
Facts or how either of those couldn’t possibly be regarded as disasters after you consider this, that, this over here, that there… it’s not even remotely a disaster, what’s wrong with you!
OP is arguing Democrats are incapable of creating a disaster.
Regardless of that that I’d still say that qualifies as a disaster. Big time, and from a whole load of angles.
Nm
You assert that ACA was a disaster and that anyone who disagrees does so out of an irrational desire to acquit the Democrats of any fault.
This is counterfactual. Many of those you’re arguing with would be happy to find Democrats guilty of not making ACA go far enough.
I was refuting the claim that the economy has suffered under Obama. If you couldn’t even figure that much out then maybe you really should lay off the weed. 
No. Go back and look at it again. Someone said that the Obama years have been “a disaster.” OP disagrees with this. Asks for examples of this disaster. Examples given are poor.
At no time is there any insinuation that Democrats are incapable of creating a disaster. At all. Ever. Only in your mind.
Now, to the point of the OP - You say that “Benghazi” still qualifies as a disaster. I will agree that it certainly was not a good thing. However, bad things like this have happened for years, over every administration. For example, on March 2, 2006, a bomb outside the US consulate in Pakistan killed a US diplomat and his driver. This was not widely seen as a “disaster” for the Bush administration. There are many other examples of attacks on embassies or diplomats under Bush. None of these were seen as “a disaster” for the Bush administration. Four Americans, including three diplomatic personel were killed in attacks during the Bush administration. Please explain then, how it becomes a “disaster” when a bad thing happens during the Obama administration?
Please note also that Republicans were in the forefront of cutting money for securityfor US embassies abroad. Do they not bear ANY responsibility for this “disaster”?
The Shah was a reliable ally against Communism. I don’t even understand why we would want to fight nationalism.
Do you have the slightest clue about the situation in Iran at the time?
In 1979 I was in grad school at a university which taught petroleum engineering. We got lots of Iranian students. I never saw signs that they were fundamentalist, but I sure as hell knew they hated the Shah.
Don’t you mean bigly?
This makes NO sense to me, and frankly seems like a symptom of everything that is wrong. Maybe there is just a significant chunk of people that do not care what the truth is, and they are completely willing to swallow whatever they are told because it fits their narrative. But don’t people even care about the truth? like at all?
I am so ready for this election to be over, but on November 9, it won’t be. Not really. I’ll still be dealing with people who hate so blindly that they believe that a man’s defense of a protester was “unhinged screaming at” him.
No, they don’t care about “the truth”. They care about their truth. Same with the 9/11 “Truth” Movement.
Sadly, you are correct. The Republicans have learned from this election - just not what they really should have learned. We will be dealing with 4 years of outright lying about things that are completely factually evident. We will be told the most outrageous lies to our faces. Why? Because this works. It works really well.
If Clinton gives an acceptance speech that says “I pledge to govern for ALL Americans, those who voted for me, and those who did not”… It will be reported as “Clinton promised revenge on Republicans and said she will take away our guns.”
I can handle the truthiness junkies when they are just some random tiny percentage of the country - or the world. But the Tangerine Nightmare will be getting more votes than a “random tiny percentage” and that depresses me.
Der Bungle’s base is the equally nutty faithful (e.g.: Joe Walsh) and hard-core Republicans who know the truth but simply cannot bring themselves to vote outside their party. One hopes that large numbers of the latter will come to their senses.
I guess I do. I consider it a failure and a disaster in how it was passed. I also consider those on the left who think it’s sunshine and happiness and all is good with it falling into the trap of the OP - if you can’t be critical of anything your party’s done, or admit any of its failures, how can you in good faith ask the opponent things done wrong that you want to ‘genuinely’ address?
You can’t. And shouldn’t feign that you could. Because the evidence at hand is nothing the Democrat side done is a wrong, or a disaster.
Cute. And yet another example of how your “true Scotts… errr, Democrat” isn’t responsible for any disaster or major mistake. You’re covered…
Actually, that was a major complaint of the ACA. That it didn’t go far enough.
Often twisted by The Right to demonstrate that a majority did not favor the ACA.
ETA: Politifact