Originally Posted by ant1999e
You're a bit mixed up there you fool. Hougtam doesn't like the fact of this debacle or that I called you out on your purely partisan posts. We were having a civil discourse earlier. Then you came in with your
"you guys got nothing. When & if Hillary runs, she will not only win the primary pretty easily but win the presidency by a big margin".
I call you out and then he attacks me for being partisan.
He changed the subject to Bush and the Iraq war because he can't explain away the truth of what happened. Not once since the Benghazi debacle have I spoke in the real world or posted in this cesspool anything about election because it isn't about that to me. I've been in many situations where I was surrounded by unfriendlies who could have overtaken us at any time. I couldn't imagine being left to die.
But I'm not surprised. That's one of the old fall backs, Bush and the Iraq war. Next thing you know I'll be accused of being racist.
Okay, let's please get something straight here. I'm not going to apologize for pointing out your partisanship, but I am sorry you assumed that since I replied to a post in which you replied to peace, that I'm somehow defending him. Although he's a liberal, he and I have very little in common in terms of how we get to our ideologies (abortion and Hillary Clinton, to name two right of the top of my head). I do not want Clinton to run, but it has nothin to do with this tragedy.
I simply replied to your post so that you knew I was speaking directly to you, and that was the last post in the thread at the time. If I had gotten here sooner, I'd have replied to that instead. I'm not one to come in and reply to each post as I read it, after the conversation has already moved on, like some people on this forum are famous for.
As far as Benghazi, as I said, there needs to be an investigation, and it needs to lead where it leads. The reason I'm calling you and the other trash Republicans out on the partisan BS is simple. You were all either silent or complicit when we went into Iraq, and then when the facts came out on WHY? Well as they say at AMC, silence is golden. Then you attempt to tie it to Clinton by saying things like "HER NAME WAS ON THE CABLE!", not realizing or not understanding that her name is on the cable for what color they should paint the lobby of the US consulate in Timbuktu.
If the investigation takes it to Clinton and we find she's at fault, then she needs to be held as accountable as everyone else. But what is happening here is people coming up with a conclusion before they start the investigation. What you and they are doing is shameless, particularly considering your history on wanting the "truth".