Spot the Bullshit

[BSmack]

Do you dispute that our military has been stretched thin as a consequence of fighting a two front war?

Hitler out front could have told you that was a bad idea.

[Diogenes]

Do you dispute that our military has been stretched thin as a consequence of fighting a two front war?

Hitler out front could have told you that was a bad idea.

It's a good thing we didn't try to operate in two different theatres of operation during WW II. We'd have been totally screwed.

But I'm sure the troops would appreciate that the left thinks they're the new Wermacht.

[BSmack]

It's a good thing we didn't try to operate in two different theatres of operation during WW II. We'd have been totally screwed.

Apples and fucking bowling balls. Maybe you noticed that the Russians are sitting this one out?

[BSmack]

Correct. We fought a three front war during WW2, you ignorant dipshit.

Yea, with the full support of The Soviet Union, Great Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and native partisan fighters throughout Europe, Africa and Asia.

Now we're fighting a two front war with no appreciable allied support in Iraq save 7,000 or so Brits and no unified popular support from the local populations.

[BSmack]

So you're saying that Islamic terrorists are as powerful as Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan combined?

No, but feel free to continue building your strawmen.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

How many of Ofucktard's blatant lies and cheezy fabrications can you spot in this transcript:

Obama is about "hope", not "facts".

[Cuda]

I'm sorry, what does that have to do with Obama fabricating this imaginary Army captain and his equally imaginary problem of having his "platoon" being sent to two different parts of world?

WHY DO YOU HATE NEGROES???!!!???!!!

[War Wagon]

Obilgepump

I laffed.

[titlover]

How many of Ofucktard's blatant lies and cheezy fabrications can you spot in this transcript:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02/21/ ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

We can start with this whopper here:

But it also means using our military wisely. And on what I believe was the single most important foreign policy decision of this generation, whether or not to go to war in Iraq, I believe I showed the judgment of a commander in chief. And I think that Senator Clinton was wrong in her judgments on that.

(APPLAUSE)

Now, that has consequences -- that has significant consequences, because it has diverted attention from Afghanistan where al Qaeda, that killed 3,000 Americans, are stronger now than at any time since 2001.

You know, I've heard from an Army captain who was the head of a rifle platoon -- supposed to have 39 men in a rifle platoon. Ended up being sent to Afghanistan with 24 because 15 of those soldiers had been sent to Iraq.

And as a consequence, they didn't have enough ammunition, they didn't have enough humvees. They were actually capturing Taliban weapons, because it was easier to get Taliban weapons than it was for them to get properly equipped by our current commander in chief.

A. There are approximately 50,000 troops in Afghanistan.

B. "Rifle platoons" are led by 2nd lieutenants not captains.

C. Platoons are never split between two separate theaters of operations under any circumstances.

D. Supply difficulties in Afghanistan are due the its remote location hundreds of miles from the nearest port and the virtually non-existent transportation infrastructure in country. To suggest otherwise demostrates either a profound ignorance of reality or deliberate dishonesty and quite possibly both.

Bdumbfuck in with something totally irrelevant about McCain in 5...4...3...2

amazingly enough though you can find a taxi cab just about anywhere. even in the most remote BFE spots

had a buddy that just got back form there that told me.

[BSmack]

Does anyone honestly believe this person is real?

What I believe is that the RNC is feeding you lines out of context to try to paint Obama in a bad light. What does this mean? It means that you've finally accepted that Hillary won't be winning the Democratic nomination.

[BSmack]

Why the red herring? The RNC is not writing his speeches. Neither is Obama, but his plagiarism is another issue though naturally it is further evidence of his fundamental dishonesty and lack of original ideas. No, this isn't about Hillary or the RNC.

This is about Oflimflam making up bullshit stories. Still waiting for your comment on that habit.

I'm not going to troll through your biased C&P of Obama's debate performance. That's the kind of old politics we're looking to change. You want to debate issues, then state your POV and how you disagree with Obama. You want to engage in name calling and slander, find someone else.

[BSmack]

Yes, the issue I want to debate is why he is telling...

Sorry, that's not an issue, that's slander.

[BSmack]

When I say that he is a liar and a plagiarist, that is a statement of fact not slander. I posted several of his more absurd lies earlier.

No, you posted some statements along with your opinions of said statements and provided absolutely nothing in the way of facts to back them up. Nor did you attempt to seek any form of clarification or elaboration about said statements. If a newspaper did something like that, they would be rightfully mocked.

[Felix]

I posted several of his more absurd lies earlier.

something you might want to look at.....

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... act-3.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

apparently they talked to the captain in question and he verifies Obama's story......

[Felix]

Oh...OK. Yes, the "obvious reason" being that he is full of shit...assuming of course that he even exists. Well that really clears everything up.

Jesus fucking Christ...

who's full of shit, the reporter or Obama.....

your reaction (which pretty much parrots that of the RNC) is why I think the captains name will eventually become public.....

[BSmack]

I posted several of his more absurd lies earlier.

something you might want to look at.....

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch ... act-3.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

apparently they talked to the captain in question and he verifies Obama's story......

So Obama addressed the officer by his CURRENT rank and not the rank he had when this story happened?

Well golly gee, I guess he's a liar.

[Felix]

What officer? What unit? What mission?

so you're asserting the ABC report is bullshit?

based on what?

[BSmack]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm asserting based on the fact that the story does not contain a single verifiable detail.

Any other questions?

Well, I'm sure we could waste a day or two, or even longer, hunting down all the pertinent details to your satisfaction. Or, we could just tell you to get fucked.

I'll take the latter option.

[BSmack]

Once again I see mv C&Pauling a story to suit his agenda.

The Army captain, a West Point graduate, did a tour in a hot area of eastern Afghanistan from the Summer of 2003 through Spring 2004.

Prior to deployment the Captain -- then a Lieutenant -- took command of a rifle platoon at Fort Drum. When he took command, the platoon had 39 members, but -- in ones and twos -- 15 members of the platoon were re-assigned to other units. He knows of 10 of those 15 for sure who went to Iraq, and he suspects the other five did as well.

The platoon was sent to Afghanistan with 24 men.

"We should have deployed with 39," he told me, "we should have gotten replacements. But we didn't. And that was pretty consistent across the battalion."

He adds that maybe a half-dozen of the 15 were replaced by the Fall of 2003, months after they arrived in Afghanistan, but never all 15.

As for the weapons and humvees, there are two distinct periods in this, as he explains -- before deployment, and afterwards.

At Fort Drum, in training, "we didn't have access to heavy weapons or the ammunition for the weapons, or humvees to train before we deployed."

What ammunition?

40 mm automatic grenade launcher ammunition for the MK-19, and ammunition for the .50 caliber M-2 machine gun ("50 cal.")

"We weren't able to train in the way we needed to train," he says. When the platoon got to Afghanistan they had three days to learn.

They also didn't have the humvees they were supposed to have both before deployment and once they were in Afghanistan, the Captain says.

"We should have had 4 up-armored humvees," he said. "We were supposed to. But at most we had three operable humvees, and it was usually just two."

So what did they do? "To get the rest of the platoon to the fight," he says, "we would use Toyota Hilux pickup trucks or unarmored flatbed humvees." Sometimes with sandbags, sometimes without.

Also in Afghanistan they had issues getting parts for their MK-19s and their 50-cals. Getting parts or ammunition for their standard rifles was not a problem.

"It was very difficult to get any parts in theater," he says, "because parts are prioritized to the theater where they were needed most -- so they were going to Iraq not Afghanistan."

"The purpose of going after the Taliban was not to get their weapons," he said, but on occasion they used Taliban weapons. Sometimes AK-47s, and they also mounted a Soviet-model DShK (or "Dishka") on one of their humvees instead of their 50 cal.

The Captain has spoken to Sen. Obama, he says, but this anecdote was relayed to Obama through an Obama staffer.

I find that Obama's anecdote checks out.

Some are quibbling about whether or not the "commander in chief" can be held responsible for how well our soldiers are being equipped, since Congress provides the funding for the military, but the Pentagon (and ultimately President Bush) are in charge of the funding mechanism.

I might suggest those on the blogosphere upset about this story would be better suited directing their ire at those responsible for this problem, which is certainly not new. That is, if they actually care about the men and women bravely serving our country at home and abroad.

Get fucked.

[BSmack]

Curiously absent are any specific, verifiable details.

Funny, I said the same thing about your initial post.

[Cuda]

Gotta admit, BSmack is nothing if not consistent; he'll slurp ANY democRat's cock: Bubba's, Reporting For Duty's, O'Bama's or Hillary's.
They ALL taste pretty schweet to him

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Gotta admit, BSmack is nothing if not consistent; he'll slurp ANY democRat's cock: Bubba's, Reporting For Duty's, O'Bama's or Hillary's.
They ALL taste pretty schweet to him

Hillary has a cock?

[BSmack]

Gotta admit, BSmack is nothing if not consistent; he'll slurp ANY democRat's cock: Bubba's, Reporting For Duty's, O'Bama's or Hillary's.
They ALL taste pretty schweet to him

Hillary has a cock?

Of course she does. She was John Reno's asexually produced hermaphroditic love child. Don't you keep up with the Interwebs?

[Diogenes]

Obama may face grilling on patriotism
By NEDRA PICKLER, Associated Press Writer


WASHINGTON - Sen. Barack Obama's refusal to wear an American flag lapel pin along with a photo of him not putting his hand over his heart during the National Anthem led conservatives on Internet and in the media to question his patriotism.

Now Obama's wife, Michelle, has drawn their ire, too, for saying recently that she's really proud of her country for the first time in her adult life.

Conservative consultants say that combined, the cases could be an issue for Obama in the general election if he wins the nomination, especially as he runs against Vietnam war hero Sen. John McCain.

"The reason it hasn't been an issue so far is that we're still in the microcosm of the Democratic primary," said Republican consultant Roger Stone. "Many Americans will find the three things offensive. Barack Obama is out of the McGovern wing of the party, and he is part of the blame America first crowd."

Opponents of Sen. John Kerry proved in the 2004 election that voters are sensitive to suggestions that a candidate is not sufficiently patriotic. The Democratic presidential nominee's campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record called the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, even though he won multiple military honors and was lauded by his superiors.

The Swift Boat campaign started as a relatively small television ad buy that exploded into an issue that dogged Kerry for months. The Massachusetts senator has conceded since losing to President Bush that the campaign and his lackluster response to unsubstantiated allegations he considered unworthy of a reaction likely cost him the election. And the term even became part of the campaign lexicon — swift boating.

Obama already is the subject of a shadowy smear campaign based on the Internet that falsely suggests he's a Muslim intent on destroying the United States. Obama is a Christian and has been fighting the e-mail hoax, which also claims he doesn't put his hand over his heart during the Pledge of Allegiance, and he's been trying to correct the misinformation.

"Whenever I'm in the United States Senate, I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America," Obama frequently tells voters.

"I've been going to the same church for 20 years, praising Jesus," he adds.

Retired Major General Scott Gration, an Obama military adviser, said he expects the attacks will only increase if Obama wins the Democratic nomination.

"People are projecting things and taking things out of context," Gration said. "There's absolutely no question in my mind that Michelle and Barack are extremely patriotic, appreciate our freedoms and our values and everything else that the flag represents."

Officials with the McCain campaign and the Republican Party say they won't be suggesting Obama is less than patriotic, and instead plan to focus their criticisms on his record and inexperience if he wins the nomination. Well-funded outside groups, however, consider anything fair game.

Conservative Republican consultant Keith Appell, who worked with the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth, said Obama's opposition to the war will create a "striking contrast between McCain the war hero and Obama the poster child for the anti-war movement."

"If you are McCain, you want to play up the decorated war hero, loves his country, served his country," Appell said. "You want to play those themes up as much as possible, especially in comparison to Obama and his role in the anti-war movement."

On Monday, Michelle Obama told an audience in Milwaukee, "For the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. Not just because Barack is doing well, but I think people are hungry for change."

Cindy McCain, McCain's wife, days later responded by saying, "I have, and always will be, proud of my country." Barack Obama has expressed frustration that his wife's remarks had been taken out of context and turned into political fodder — both the Obamas say she was talking about politics in the United States, not the country itself.

Last summer, Obama was photographed by Time magazine at an event in Iowa standing with his hands folded during the national anthem. His primary rivals Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson appear beside him, with their hands on their hearts.

It has been repeatedly reported that the moment came during the Pledge of Allegiance, but that's not the case.

In October, Obama told Iowa television station KCRG that he decided to stop wearing a U.S. flag lapel pin during the run-up to the Iraq war because it had become "a substitute for, I think, true patriotism."

"I decided I won't wear that pin on my chest. Instead, I'm going to try to tell the American people what I believe will make this country great and, hopefully, that will be a testimony to my patriotism," Obama said.

Obama's comments led conservatives and media commentators to question his patriotism.

"First he kicked his American flag pin to the curb. Now Barack Obama has a new round of patriotism problems. Wait until you hear what the White House hopeful didn't do during the singing of the national anthem," said Steve Doocy, co-host of "Fox and Friends" on the Fox News Channel.

"He felt it OK to come out of the closet as the domestic insurgent he is," former radio host Mark Williams said on Fox.

Gration said he had a copy of the national anthem photo e-mailed to him by a friend who didn't know the facts and questioned how a military man could support someone who doesn't honor the Pledge of Allegiance.

"I go to baseball games and football games and there's just a minority of us who put our hands over our heart. It's not an indication of patriotism," Gration said. Gration said he personally wears a flag pin, but "if I meet someone who doesn't have a lapel pin, it doesn't mean they are more or less patriotic than I am."

And, he added, "I don't think you can find Barack again not putting his hand over his heart at the national anthem."


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/obama_attack_fodder" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[BSmack]

Well, I guess if the Republicans can't attack Obama for being a tool of corporate lobbyists ('sup McCain?), then they'll just have to resort to the old tried and true of distortion, slander and innuendo. Too bad for them it won't be working this time.

[Diogenes]

...they'll just have to resort to the old tried and true of distortion, slander and innuendo. Too bad for them it won't be working this time.

By 'distortion, slander and innuendo' you mean telling the truth? Of course it won't work with his base, they're as anti-American as he is.

[BSmack]

...they'll just have to resort to the old tried and true of distortion, slander and innuendo. Too bad for them it won't be working this time.

By 'distortion, slander and innuendo' you mean telling the truth? Of course it won't work with his base, they're as anti-American as he is.

If you actually knew just how retarded you sound when you call a United States Senator "anti-American", what you say might be funny. But I'm guessing you don't. Which makes it pathetic.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Well, I guess if the Republicans can't attack Obama for being a tool of corporate lobbyists ('sup McCain?), then they'll just have to resort to the old tried and true of distortion, slander and innuendo. Too bad for them it won't be working this time.

Yes it will. It always does.

[Diogenes]

...they'll just have to resort to the old tried and true of distortion, slander and innuendo. Too bad for them it won't be working this time.

By 'distortion, slander and innuendo' you mean telling the truth? Of course it won't work with his base, they're as anti-American as he is.

If you actually knew just how retarded you sound when you call a United States Senator "anti-American", what you say might be funny. But I'm guessing you don't. Which makes it pathetic.

Considering the source, who cares whether you laugh or cry?

[Mister Bushice]

Prior to deployment the Captain -- then a Lieutenant -- took command of a rifle platoon at Fort Drum. When he took command, the platoon had 39 members, but -- in ones and twos -- 15 members of the platoon were re-assigned to other units. He knows of 10 of those 15 for sure who went to Iraq, and he suspects the other five did as well.

The platoon was sent to Afghanistan with 24 men.

"We should have deployed with 39," he told me, "we should have gotten replacements. But we didn't. And that was pretty consistent across the battalion."

He adds that maybe a half-dozen of the 15 were replaced by the Fall of 2003, months after they arrived in Afghanistan, but never all 15.

So - 39 soldiers is the absolute minimum required number of soldiers for a platoon? First time I've ever heard that. I don't see that there's really any story here. They were deployed with a number of soldiers that (seems to me) to be within the range that defines a platoon. End of story.

If anything, this kind of crap just supports an Obama "empty suit" theory. He's telling a meaningless tale intended to bash his opponents and prop up his own campaign, instead of actually having a plan - you know, like Kerry always had ;)

I've yet to see or hear him say anything of great substance, just a lot of pretty words with nothing behind them. He gives people hope? Yeah? Really? Hope?

well, go ahead and shit in one hand....

He seems to me to be a darker skinned version of Kerry, without the past to haunt him.

And from the looks of it, his wife would be more of a shrill bitch than Hilary ever was in her days as first wife.

Not that I'd want an old man like McCain as pres because I seriously don't think he'd live thru it and we'd be stuck with his VP, but the dem candidates are fucking scary.

[Diogenes]

Not that I'd want an old man like McCain as pres because I seriously don't think he'd live thru it and we'd be stuck with his VP, but the dem candidates are fucking scary.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Best reason to vote for McRINO yet. (Depending on who the running mate is of course. But none could be as bad as Hitlery or Che Obama).

The other seven reasons are (agreeing with Hugh Hewitt here) the WOT and 6 SC Justices over the age of 67.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

Best reason to vote for McRINO yet. (Depending on who the running mate is of course.

Romney's not coming back. Just stop already.

[Diogenes]

I'll settle for Newt. Or Condi.

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I'll settle for Newt. Or Condi.

Wow. Talk about "slumming it".

[Mister Bushice]

Neither one will happen anyway. Newt is waaay over, Condi has zero credibility based on her inability to accomplish anything meaningful as SOS.

McCain will go for some republican Governor who can take over in 2012 or sooner when Mccain croaks.

[Dinsdale]

slander.

If a newspaper did something like that, they would be rightfully mocked.

Quite possibly. One thing I can tell you for fact that wouldn't come from a newspaper doing such things, would be "slander" charges.

I promise.



Just a word to the wise -- before you go trying to sound all intelligent and informed and stuff, you might wanna mix in a fucking dictionary.

Jeebus.

[BSmack]

slander.

If a newspaper did something like that, they would be rightfully mocked.

Quite possibly. One thing I can tell you for fact that wouldn't come from a newspaper doing such things, would be "slander" charges.

I promise.

Only because Obama is a person currently running for President of the United States. Say that shit about say... Ariel Sharon ('sup Marty?) and you get a libel judgement.

Funny that REPUTABLE newspapers are staying away from that "story" like it's fucking toxic. But no, it has nothing to do with journalistic standards, ethics or the desire to avoid getting humiliated on the national stage.

Just a word to the wise -- before you go trying to sound all intelligent and informed and stuff, you might wanna mix in a fucking dictionary.

I will. Right after I get done watching the Hostory Channel.

[Dinsdale]

Say that shit about say... Ariel Sharon ('sup Marty?) and you get a libel judgement.

No, seriously -- I wasn't kidding about the dictionary thing.

Ho. Lee. Fuck.


You really don't think that your "take" is producing anything but laughter, do you?

Miiiiight just want to have some clue what you're talking about before you start yapping.


Fuckin'A.

[BSmack]

Dins,

Either make your fucking point or STFU. Nobody gives a fuck about the law degree you got from Rolling Stone.

[Mike the Lab Rat]

What I think dinsy is getting at:
(from law.com)

slander
n. oral defamation, in which someone tells one or more persons an untruth about another, which untruth will harm the reputation of the person defamed. Slander is a civil wrong (tort) and can be the basis for a lawsuit. ...Words spoken over the air on television or radio are treated as libel (written defamation) and not slander on the theory that broadcasting reaches a large audience as much as if not more than printed publications.

libel
to publish in print (including pictures), writing or broadcast through radio, television or film, an untruth about another which will do harm to that person or his/her reputation, by tending to bring the target into ridicule, hatred, scorn or contempt of others. Libel is the written or broadcast form of defamation, distinguished from slander, which is oral defamation.

The short version: spoken lies = slander, published/broadcast lies=libel.

Is dinsy playing his nitpicking game? Of course, that's his m.o.

Does it address the main points Bri made? Not at all. Once again, that's his m.o.