LOL, I thought several folks here would appreciate that 'weak' evidence since similarly 'weak' evidence has been mentioned on these forums many times in the past and again in just the past few days as a means to imply that the Bush administration was lax in securing America on 9/11. It's sometimes hard to resist that goose/gander thing.
Sorry about using two examples in one sentence. I simply assumed that a 'high information voter' such as yourself kept up with political news, especially those items that have been around for a while. Here ya go: http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...4e1_story.htmlSo where, in this supposedly 'damning' article does it say that President Obama failed to attend some meeting? Or are you just channeling Rush Beck?
Thanks again for your inappropriate display of condecension. It makes it easy to see where you're coming from.I'll tell you one thing all this tells me. It tells me how easily religious fundamentalist are manipulated and spun up to use as pawns for political gain. Kind of how Fox Nation spins up the low information folks, where you probably got this link.![]()