O'Reilly: Benghazi is Obama's Watergate! Yeah, That's the Ticket

Look, Bill: All that happened after the horrendous incident in Libya was that Susan Rice went on air and repeated to the media what information was given to her by the CIA. Full Story
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#65 Nov 21, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>the MSM covered it up? it's been in the news since day one!
Outright lies prove you have no argument, just a parrot....
wanna cracker?
Like you say Fox news does not count and thus, your lies that it has been covered in the MSM is an outright lie once again or are you telling me that Fox News is now MSM? Rice and many others in the Obama administration called it a "popular uprising" against an anti-Islamic film and the MSM reported / covered it up in that way for about 2 weeks. I guess you missed this:

http://www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/saletan-e...

"The intelligence from Libya was confused all along. The attack took place in the midst of uprisings against the video across the Muslim world, aimed particularly at U.S. embassies. The rage, though real, was ignited and stoked by anti-American extremists. That's how it often is with mob violence: One man's motivation is another man's pretext. In Benghazi, witnesses saw attackers and onlookers. The problem was figuring out the relationship between them. The CIA's initial assessments suggested a hybrid scenario: a protest "spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo" that "evolved into a direct assault" by extremists.

If you look back at the administration's early statements, you'll see signs of this uncertainty. Spokesmen talked about the video in the context of the Muslim riots generally. On Sept. 14, ABC's Jake Tapper asked White House Press Secretary Jay Carney whether this was true in Benghazi. "We certainly don't know," said Carney. In her now-infamous tour of the Sunday talk shows on Sept. 16, U.N. Ambassador Susan Rice parroted CIA assessments, asserting that a protest at the consulate "seems to have been hijacked" by "extremists who came with heavier weapons." On Sept. 18, Carney repeated that the video had "caused the unrest in Cairo" and "precipitated some of the unrest in Benghazi." But he added, "What other factors were involved is a matter of investigation." On Sept. 20, Obama said protests over the video "were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests." On Sept. 26, Libya's president, Mohammed Magarief, told NBC News that the video "has nothing to do with this attack." But he offered no evidence other than the sophistication of the weapons and tactics. A week later, a former intelligence chief for the Libyan rebels echoed Magarief's assertion, but again added no evidence.

The Obama administration's story began to shift during a State Department conference call on Oct. 9, when a reporter asked what had "led officials to believe for the first several days that this was prompted by protests against the video." A department official replied, "That was not our conclusion." This was a renunciation of the protest story, not the video's relevance. But nobody noticed. "

GEE, IT LOOKS LIKE THEY WERE PUTTING THE UPRISING THE VIDEO STORY FIRST UNTIL THEY SPOKE THE TRUTH AS BEING SHOWN THROUGH THE MEMOS.
remember

Miami, FL

#66 Nov 21, 2012
rollin wrote:
<quoted text>
Here are some facts for you:
FACT: While bush was in office 11 US embassies were attacked
FACT: 54 Americans were murdered in these attacks.
FACT: GOP outrage for these attacks was NON EXISTENT
Tell me again how this isn't sore loser politics.
a lot of that shit happened under carter too.

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#67 Nov 21, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Skippy, then back up your posts all the time as your fellow liberal posters never do. BTW, it is not fake outrage by the GOP. They are outraged now because there is A DEAD AMBASSADOR AND OBAMA IS CALLING IT "A BUMP IN THE ROAD" AS IF THE AMBASSADOR AND HIS PROTECTORS LIVES MEAN NOTHING. OBAMA WANTS TO PRETEND THAT HE IS IN CONTROL OF EVERYTHING WHEN WE CAN SEE THAT HIS POLICIES MAKE HIM IN CONTROL OF VERY LITTLE, IF ANYTHING. Just look at the rest of the Middle East to that fact - even the liberal AP has seen that fact.
BTW Skippy, the GOP has been concerned about all the attacks on Americans From 9/11 to the the USS Cole to Kenya on down. Whereas the attacks that do not fit Obama's agenda, he appears to not care.
I'll back up and post you disagree with skippy, how is that. Which FACT that I have put forth do you feel is inaccurate?

FACT - Obama never called a dead ambassador a bump in the road

HORSESHIT the GOP has been concerned. Why is Embassy attack #12 the ONLY one their are faking outrage over?

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#68 Nov 21, 2012
remember wrote:
<quoted text>a lot of that shit happened under carter too.
A lot happened under Reagan too skippy.
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#69 Nov 21, 2012
remember wrote:
<quoted text>a lot of that shit happened under carter too.
Yep as the liberals forget about the new up and comer "Iran". It is funny how the Obamatons and Obama want to blame everything on Bush. I bet they will blame Bush for things that happened before his birth. lol
Brandt Hardin

Memphis, TN

#70 Nov 21, 2012
The situation in Libya is being politicized and the victims and there families being instrumented as a ruse to create doubt of Obama’s leadership. Public access to real facts is being whitewashed by this rhetoric while conservative hands paint the Blackface on our President. Watch them mix and apply the paints to his face in a portrait of Obama being Bamboozed by the Far Right at http://dregstudiosart.blogspot.com/2012/10/ba...

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#71 Nov 21, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Yep as the liberals forget about the new up and comer "Iran". It is funny how the Obamatons and Obama want to blame everything on Bush. I bet they will blame Bush for things that happened before his birth. lol
You seem to have no problems blaming Obama for things before his birth..AND his birth

LMAO dipshyt
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#72 Nov 21, 2012
rollin wrote:
<quoted text>
I'll back up and post you disagree with skippy, how is that. Which FACT that I have put forth do you feel is inaccurate?
FACT - Obama never called a dead ambassador a bump in the road
HORSESHIT the GOP has been concerned. Why is Embassy attack #12 the ONLY one their are faking outrage over?
I have no problem disagreeing with you and when you are right I will agree that too. Here is the "bump in the road" remark to Steve Kroft.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/24/obama-s...

"Obama: Sacked consulate and dead ambassador “bumps in the road”

posted at 10:01 am on September 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The next of a few problematic statements from Barack Obama’s 60 Minutes interview comes to us from The Weekly Standard, which catches Obama in an least an unfortunate bit of phraseology. Steve Kroft asks Obama whether the attacks on American embassies around the Muslim world, and especially in Libya and Egypt following Obama’s military and diplomatic interventions, had changed his mind about the Arab Spring. Obama gives a you-gotta-break-a-few-eggs-to- make-an-omelette response that’s pretty inappropriate, considering the outcome in Benghazi:" ...
"The violence isn’t a mere “bump in the road,” and neither are the rise of these groups to power. They are going to be national-security concerns for the next several decades. That’s the outcome we wanted to avoid, and the one reason why we allied ourselves with Mubarak and ended up in an arms-length relationship with Qaddafi. The assassination of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and the sacking of the Benghazi consulate weren’t “bumps in the road,” either, unless one thinks that kind of thing is normal even between diplomatic antagonists."

Again I said that the republican were concerned or upset about all the attacks on American like 9/11 and USS Cole, etc. Their further outrage is that Obama is treating dead Ambassadors and 3 other people as "bumps in the road" and "not Optimal" instead of dead Americans that we should mourn.

Not optimal remark is here on Jon Stewart.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/18/obama-o...
...
Obama :“Here’s what I’ll say. If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal. We’re going to fix it. All of it. And what happens, during the course of a presidency, is that the government is a big operation and any given time something screws up. And you make sure that you find out what’s broken and you fix it. Whatever else I have done throughout the course of my presidency the one thing that I’ve been absolutely clear about is that America’s security comes, and the American people need to know exactly how I make decisions when it comes to war, peace, security, and protecting Americans. And they will continue to get that over the next four years of my presidency.”

It was Stewart who introduced the word “optimal,” something I didn’t realize when I first heard about O’s quote. As is, it reads to me like Obama’s mirroring his language for effect, precisely because the word’s not equal to the task of describing what happened. E.g.,“It seems like our air defenses at Pearl Harbor were less than optimal.”“Yeah, when you have most of the Pacific fleet destroyed in one day, that’s not optimal.” In other words, there is — or should be — a scare-quotes element to “optimal.” But maybe I’m wrong and the clip will show that he means it literally and really is this much of a callous jackhole. He has been known to use dry, off-putting, minimizing euphemisms to downplay the Benghazi attack, after all. Either way, Toby Harnden’s probably right that Team Mitt will use it against him, either in ads or at the debate on Monday. Because public reaction to all this is, shall we say, not optimal for Obama either:"
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#73 Nov 21, 2012
rollin wrote:
<quoted text>
A lot happened under Reagan too skippy.
All of the leaders and more under some US governments than others.
Therealnews com

East Islip, NY

#74 Nov 21, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
All of the leaders and more under some US governments than others.
The USS Stark Incident
http://tinyurl.com/3e7fx
http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm

The Iran-Contra Affair 20 Years On
Documents Spotlight Role of Reagan, Top Aides
Pentagon Nominee Robert Gates Among Many
Prominent Figures Involved in the Scandal
http://tinyurl.com/y9rduo
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB210...

Iran-Contra Felons Get Good Jobs from Bush
http://tinyurl.com/ebx8
http://www.blythe.org/nytransfer-subs/Central...

========

Republican Presidents Dereliction of Duty
Ronald Reagan, who did not retaliate for the murder of 278 United States Marines in Beirut and who violated his own terrorism policy by trading arms for hostages in what came to be called the Iran-Contra scandal; http://tinyurl.com/9s52o

George H.W. Bush, who did not retaliate for the Libyan murder of 259 passengers on Pan Am 103; who did not have an official counter terrorism policy; who left Saddam Hussein in place, requiring the United States to leave a large military presence in Saudi Arabia.

George W. Bush who did not alert the airports having known the CIA warning memo August 6, 2001: Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda determined to strike inside the United States. FBI warned John Ashcroft July 26, 2001 not to fly on commercial airlines.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/nat...
OH NO You Did not

Rancho Cucamonga, CA

#75 Nov 21, 2012
Therealnews com wrote:
<quoted text>
The USS Stark Incident
http://tinyurl.com/3e7fx
http://eightiesclub.tripod.com/id344.htm
The Iran-Contra Affair 20 Years On
Documents Spotlight Role of Reagan, Top Aides
Pentagon Nominee Robert Gates Among Many
Prominent Figures Involved in the Scandal
http://tinyurl.com/y9rduo
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB210...
Iran-Contra Felons Get Good Jobs from Bush
http://tinyurl.com/ebx8
http://www.blythe.org/nytransfer-subs/Central...
========
Republican Presidents Dereliction of Duty
Ronald Reagan, who did not retaliate for the murder of 278 United States Marines in Beirut and who violated his own terrorism policy by trading arms for hostages in what came to be called the Iran-Contra scandal; http://tinyurl.com/9s52o
George H.W. Bush, who did not retaliate for the Libyan murder of 259 passengers on Pan Am 103; who did not have an official counter terrorism policy; who left Saddam Hussein in place, requiring the United States to leave a large military presence in Saudi Arabia.
George W. Bush who did not alert the airports having known the CIA warning memo August 6, 2001: Usama bin Laden and al Qaeda determined to strike inside the United States. FBI warned John Ashcroft July 26, 2001 not to fly on commercial airlines.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2001/07/26/nat...
Why are you such a hater? You know the more that you tear the Republicans down just shows you how low you will go. It appears you are playing the hate game of Ad Homenin when you know the other poster is correct in their posting. It just shows how desperate you have become.
Tissue

Ironton, OH

#76 Nov 22, 2012
Therealnews com wrote:
<quoted text>
The USS Stark Incident
http://tinyurs
Shhh, they don't want to hear any truth.

They want to feign outrage,it's all they have left.

They know,as you know,Obama is going to finish his second term regardless.

They are just regurgitating all the sh!t conservative media has been feeding them 24/7.

They tell them to be outraged and they reciprocate.

Ask them to be outraged for all the dead in Iraq, they just say 3,000 dead was somehow "worth it".

Bush did the right thing feeding America's youth to the grinder "for freedom".

Block heads..........

Since: Dec 07

Location hidden

#77 Nov 22, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no problem disagreeing with you and when you are right I will agree that too. Here is the "bump in the road" remark to Steve Kroft.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/09/24/obama-s...
"Obama: Sacked consulate and dead ambassador “bumps in the road”
posted at 10:01 am on September 24, 2012 by Ed Morrissey
The next of a few problematic statements from Barack Obama’s 60 Minutes interview comes to us from The Weekly Standard, which catches Obama in an least an unfortunate bit of phraseology. Steve Kroft asks Obama whether the attacks on American embassies around the Muslim world, and especially in Libya and Egypt following Obama’s military and diplomatic interventions, had changed his mind about the Arab Spring. Obama gives a you-gotta-break-a-few-eggs-to- make-an-omelette response that’s pretty inappropriate, considering the outcome in Benghazi:" ...
"The violence isn’t a mere “bump in the road,” and neither are the rise of these groups to power. They are going to be national-security concerns for the next several decades. That’s the outcome we wanted to avoid, and the one reason why we allied ourselves with Mubarak and ended up in an arms-length relationship with Qaddafi. The assassination of Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and the sacking of the Benghazi consulate weren’t “bumps in the road,” either, unless one thinks that kind of thing is normal even between diplomatic antagonists."
Again I said that the republican were concerned or upset about all the attacks on American like 9/11 and USS Cole, etc. Their further outrage is that Obama is treating dead Ambassadors and 3 other people as "bumps in the road" and "not Optimal" instead of dead Americans that we should mourn.
Not optimal remark is here on Jon Stewart.
http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/18/obama-o...
...
Obama :“Here’s what I’ll say. If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal. We’re going to fix it. All of it. And what happens, during the course of a presidency, is that the government is a big operation and any given time something screws up. And you make sure that you find out what’s broken and you fix it. Whatever else I have done throughout the course of my presidency the one thing that I’ve been absolutely clear about is that America’s security comes, and the American people need to know exactly how I make decisions when it comes to war, peace, security, and protecting Americans. And they will continue to get that over the next four years of my presidency.”
It was Stewart who introduced the word “optimal,” something I didn’t realize when I first heard about O’s quote. As is, it reads to me like Obama’s mirroring his language for effect, precisely because the word’s not equal to the task of describing what happened. E.g.,“It seems like our air defenses at Pearl Harbor were less than optimal.”“Yeah, when you have most of the Pacific fleet destroyed in one day, that’s not optimal.” In other words, there is — or should be — a scare-quotes element to “optimal.” But maybe I’m wrong and the clip will show that he means it literally and really is this much of a callous jackhole. He has been known to use dry, off-putting, minimizing euphemisms to downplay the Benghazi attack, after all. Either way, Toby Harnden’s probably right that Team Mitt will use it against him, either in ads or at the debate on Monday. Because public reaction to all this is, shall we say, not optimal for Obama either:"
Read your entire link, Where did he say a terrorist attack, or the death were bumps in the road? I can't find it, would you kindly tell me what paragraph it is contained?

FACTS - confounding republicans since 1973
Therealnews com

East Islip, NY

#78 Nov 22, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
Why are you such a hater? You know the more that you tear the Republicans down just shows you how low you will go. It appears you are playing the hate game of Ad Homenin when you know the other poster is correct in their posting. It just shows how desperate you have become.
You live in a Fox News Propaganda Bubble my friend.

I know for a fact that Obama and Clinton sold out the liberals.

Obamacare is a Republican health plan endorsed by Bob Dole and the Heritage Foundation back in the 1990s, implemented by Romney.

Liberals wanted Single Payer Health Care which would have been Medicare For All.

Bill Clinton and all the Newt Gingrich Republicans destroyed Glass/Steagall which protected our masses from Banksters.

NAFTA only benefits the wealthiest.

==========

Revolving door for health care aides / 9/15/09 / http://tinyurl.com/q243zq
Some of the most influential aides in the closed-door Senate Finance Committee negotiations over health care reform have ties to interests that would be directly affected by the legislation.
Before she was hired last year as senior counsel to Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Liz Fowler worked as a highly paid public policy adviser for WellPoint Inc., the nation’s largest publicly traded health benefits company.
Mark Hayes, health policy director and chief health counsel for Finance Committee ranking member Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), is married to a registered lobbyist for a firm that represents drug companies and hospital groups, although the couple says she doesn’t lobby Grassley’s office.
Frederick Isasi, a health policy adviser to Sen. Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.), was a registered lobbyist at Powell Goldstein, where his clients included public hospitals and the American Stroke Association.
Kate Spaziani, senior health policy aide to Sen. Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), was also a registered lobbyist at Powell Goldstein, although Conrad’s office says she worked as a lawyer — not as a lobbyist — for public hospitals on Medicare issues.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/271...

======

Uncle Bucky William H.T. Bush sits on the board of Health Care with Susan Bayh the Democratic Senators wife.
http://tinyurl.com/yjxnggq
http://ir.wellpoint.com/phoenix.zhtml...
andet1987

Chicago, IL

#79 Nov 22, 2012
Canepole wrote:
Benghazigate is going nowhere. As usual the far right will waste time and money pursuing a lost cause. Obama is the teflon president. He will still be the president until 2017. GET OVER IT LOSERS!!!!!!!!!!
you are the loser you f***king retard !! you will be spending a lot because of Obama's bad economy and inflation. you will not save a penny because of your idiot decision in electing an idiot !!

Since: Jun 08

Inverness, FL

#80 Nov 22, 2012
woodtick57 wrote:
<quoted text>what?!!? Where would you get that i feel treatened by people of color?
if you can't defend your foreign ploicy posiotion, attacking me with something I never said won't help.
Pauls'(and yours)foreign policy plan has been proven to not work before you were born. We do not need to ggo back to a failed policy.
All I said was that I do not feel threatened by others who are different than me. I was not implying that you do. I do not care if you agree with me on foreign policy or anything else for that matter. It is not my intention to sway others. I'm just offering my opinion and I believe that a more hands off approach abroad will be beneficial in more ways than one. I would love for you to elaborate on your claims that Ron Pauls' positions failed before I was born.
andet1987

Chicago, IL

#81 Nov 22, 2012
rollin wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to have no problems blaming Obama for things before his birth..AND his birth
LMAO dipshyt
another 4 years of trying to budget and making both ends meet with your small welfare, Obama's bad economy, and Obama's soaring inflation. just pray hard that Obama will increase your welfare a little bit. now on your knees !!!
Therealnews com

East Islip, NY

#83 Nov 22, 2012
andet1987 wrote:
<quoted text>
you are the loser you f***king retard !! you will be spending a lot because of Obama's bad economy and inflation. you will not save a penny because of your idiot decision in electing an idiot !!
Look in the mirror my friend.

Bush and Cheney lied and thousands of Americans died.

==========

Ex-CIA Official Paul Pillar Faults Use of Data on Iraq
Intelligence 'Misused' to Justify War, He Says
February 10, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/azl6w

The former CIA official who coordinated U.S. intelligence on the Middle East until last year has accused the Bush administration of "cherry-picking" intelligence on Iraq to justify a decision it had already reached to go to war, and of ignoring warnings that the country could easily fall into violence and chaos after an invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

Paul R Pillar's critique is one of the most severe indictments of White House actions by a former Bush official since Richard C. Clarke, a former National Security Council staff member, went public with his criticism of the administration's handling of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and its failure to deal with the terrorist threat beforehand.

It is also the first time that such a senior intelligence officer has so directly and publicly condemned the administration's handling of intelligence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...

1948 Smith-Mundt Act The 1948 Smith-Mundt Act prohibited the domestic dissemination of United States government propaganda. The reasoning behind Smith-Mundt was that Congress wanted to be certain that a United States government agency could not brainwash our own citizens as Hitler had done in Germany.

=========

A Spy Speaks Out
Former Top CIA Official Tyler Drumheller On "Faulty" Intelligence Claims /
http://tinyurl.com/rle4x / April 23, 2006

"The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy."

Tyler Drumheller CIA Ret.

(CBS) When no weapons of mass destruction surfaced in Iraq, President Bush insisted that all those WMD claims before the war were the result of faulty intelligence. But a former top CIA official, Tyler Drumheller — a 26-year veteran of the agency — has decided to do something CIA officials at his level almost never do: Speak out.

He tells correspondent Ed Bradley the real failure was not in the intelligence community but in the White House. He says he saw how the Bush administration, time and again, welcomed intelligence that fit the president's determination to go to war and turned a blind eye to intelligence that did not.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60m...
andet1987

Chicago, IL

#85 Nov 22, 2012
Therealnews com wrote:
<quoted text>
Look in the mirror my friend.
Bush and Cheney lied and thousands of Americans died.
==========
Ex-CIA Official Paul Pillar Faults Use of Data on Iraq
Intelligence 'Misused' to Justify War, He Says
February 10, 2006 / http://tinyurl.com/azl6w
The former CIA official who coordinated U.S. intelligence on the Middle East until last year has accused the Bush administration of "cherry-picking" intelligence on Iraq to justify a decision it had already reached to go to war, and of ignoring warnings that the country could easily fall into violence and chaos after an invasion to overthrow Saddam Hussein.
Paul R Pillar's critique is one of the most severe indictments of White House actions by a former Bush official since Richard C. Clarke, a former National Security Council staff member, went public with his criticism of the administration's handling of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and its failure to deal with the terrorist threat beforehand.
It is also the first time that such a senior intelligence officer has so directly and publicly condemned the administration's handling of intelligence.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/...
1948 Smith-Mundt Act The 1948 Smith-Mundt Act prohibited the domestic dissemination of United States government propaganda. The reasoning behind Smith-Mundt was that Congress wanted to be certain that a United States government agency could not brainwash our own citizens as Hitler had done in Germany.
=========
A Spy Speaks Out
Former Top CIA Official Tyler Drumheller On "Faulty" Intelligence Claims /
http://tinyurl.com/rle4x / April 23, 2006
"The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy."
Tyler Drumheller CIA Ret.
(CBS) When no weapons of mass destruction surfaced in Iraq, President Bush insisted that all those WMD claims before the war were the result of faulty intelligence. But a former top CIA official, Tyler Drumheller — a 26-year veteran of the agency — has decided to do something CIA officials at his level almost never do: Speak out.
He tells correspondent Ed Bradley the real failure was not in the intelligence community but in the White House. He says he saw how the Bush administration, time and again, welcomed intelligence that fit the president's determination to go to war and turned a blind eye to intelligence that did not.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60m...
what has Romney got to do with Bush and Cheney ?

Romney could have improved the economy. now suffer the consequences of reelecting Obama who will make the economy much worse.

Since: Jun 08

Inverness, FL

#86 Nov 22, 2012
OH NO You Did not wrote:
<quoted text>
NO, Romney correctly pointed out it was a terrorist attack long before Obama even slightly admitted to it and in fact, he really did not admit to it until after the election when it does not matter and the MSM basically covered it up for him as they dug more deeply into the Petreaus sex thing than dead people in Benghazi. Why should an ambassador die because Obama wants to seem in control of foreign affairs? I mean the powers in the Middle East see that he is not in control and that is the main reason why they are acting so aggressive, IMO.
Who really cares what Romney says. He is a non-factor. He lost, get over it. What has he ever done in regards to national security or foreign affairs? Please inform me........ You continue to blame the president for the incident but never mention the perpetrators. Why is that? Why is it so important to you that the incident wasn't labeled a terrorist attack immediately? With your logic, every time someone is shot and killed we should declare it a terrorist attack instantly. I can see the headlines now,"3 killed on street corner by drive-by terrorist","Man finds wife in bed with another man and kills them both in terrorist attack","Hunter kills another hunter in terrorist attack", "Home invasion by masked terrorists results in 2 deaths". REALLY? Personally I appreciate the fact that the president isn't prone to knee-jerk reactions or quick assumptions. He assembles the facts and them forms an opinion, as it should be.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Top Stories Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Prove there's a god. (Mar '08) 7 min River Tam 775,279
Roman Catholic church only true church, says Va... (Jul '07) 21 min truth 559,497
Blaming Israel for carnage (Jul '06) 31 min Uzi 119,653
Tamil vs Kannada. Which one is the oldest langu... (Oct '12) 46 min royal kannadiga 1,269
Why Should Jesus Love Me? (Feb '08) 51 min truth 605,006
Was 9/11 a conspiracy?? (Oct '07) 54 min who 265,145
Kokopelli's Place, too (Jan '08) 1 hr Jolly 23,970
Bush is a hero (Sep '07) 5 hr Lost In Transition 175,630
More from around the web