How can any Congressman,Senator or American citizen take Obama seriously in regards to Syria.

First you had Fast N Furious where the Obama admin was running guns and assault weapons to Mexican drug lords that resulted in American deaths as well as hundreds of innocent Mexicans. When Congress tried to get information from the DOJ on what was going on, Obama claimed "executive privilege".

The came Benghazi, where Obama and clowns like Susan Rice tried to sell the American public that it was all about some "amateur video" and wasn't till several weeks later they admitted it was a planned terror attack NOT a video that caused the death's of our Ambassador and three other American's.

Then came the IRS scandal, where people and groups opposed to Obama were targeted by the IRS. The top IRS official in charge of that dept of the IRS has taken the 5th in her testimony in front of Congress.

Then came the Dept of Justice and their spying on reporters and news outlets. Eric Holder, the top law enforcement officer of the land testified that he was not aware of any phone or wire taps on reporters or news organizations. Two days after his testimony it was leaked that not only did he sign off on the wire taps, but they also lied to a Fed judge, saying this respected reporter was involved with espionage and a flight risk just to get the warrants.

Then came the NSA debacle, John Brennan, the head of the CIA was asked by Congress if he was aware of any spying on ordinary Americans. His answer was of course, no. Less then two days later it was leaked that the NSA mined data from everyone's cell phone's and e-mail.

Let's not forget about Obamacare, Remember the "you have to pass it in order to see what's in it"?
Now three years later we are seeing just how screwed we all are. Seems every passing week there are more unconstitutional changes, more delays and new waivers for special interest groups.

I don't think Obama lost any credibility, I for one, never thought he had any in the first place!

could have skipped all the 'facts'

and just posted the last sentence,,,,clearly

Brang it on, Bro!

pick a president, any president

type their name in any search engine with the word 'scandal'

and when we find one that has none,,we can start a thread on the rare animal that is a president with 'credibility'

where credibility equals never having been rumored or accused to have done anything,,,,

Finally, at least you accept them as facts and not some racist rants

Que milagro!
How did you do it?

nope

that's why 'facts' is in quotes

as stated above, you can find such allegations and 'scandals' a list long about just about any president in the social media age

Reagan and Bush both have a long list

so their 'credibility' I guess, is in the same place,, whatever that means in the long run,,,



one is REVERED (raegan) and one is not (Bush),,,,so such 'credibility' doesn't amount to much apparently

yes you might find one, maybe two scandals in a "few" admins..but this is ridiculous.
Obama makes Nixon look like a member of Mother Theressa's convent

Just exactly what "facts" are you disputing?

seriously, a few?

lets look at the revered Ronald Reagan

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reagan_administration_scandals


guilt by association,,? oliver north slip our minds?

any government official charged with anything under a President makes them lose credibility?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_federal_politicians_convicted_of_crimes#1981.E2.80.931989_.28Reagan_.28R.29_presidency.29

not comparing Reagan or anyone else.
Stick to the "facts" I raised in the thread!

re or less the exception,but Obama has made it the rule!

as if anything that refutes the Obama as antichrist perception some have will be seriously considered.....lol

fast and furious http://www.politifact.com/texas/statements/2012/jun/18/rick-perry/rick-perry-says-obama/

Benghazi, initial reports WERE wrong,,,

no PROOF people were singled out who opposed OBama

on wiretaps, Holden didn't say he wasn't aware of taps, he said he hadn't been involved in charging a reporter for releasing information,

as to the affidavit/warrant
'In a 2010 affidavit in support of the search warrant, an FBI agent named Rosen as a possible "co-conspirator" in the case because he "asked, solicited and encouraged" Kim to give him information.'


as to 'leaks',, they aren't proof of much except someones accusation,,still have seen no proof that government is collecting or listening/reading everones phone calls or emails, let alone the manpower involved to review would be redundant



as far as passing a bill to see it,,,one person said it, and it happens to be true,, although people could certainly see what was being currently 'proposed',, for the bill

the bill isn't a bill until it is PASSED to become a bill,,,

Pestosi said, they have to pass the bill to KNOW what's in.

Big difference to liberal spin.
Fact. Hussein is a warmonger and libs who support him are as low as him.

He be lower than a snakes belly in a wagon rut.

not quite!

A bill is a proposed law under consideration by a legislature.[1] A bill does not become law until it is passed by the legislature and, in most cases, approved by the executive. Once a bill has been enacted into law, it is called an act or a statute.WIKI

http://votesmart.org/education/how-a-bill-becomes-law

http://kids.clerk.house.gov/grade-school/lesson.html?intID=17

I, for one, will wait to see what Dodo says.