Benghazi: Most people..just dont care! Give it up already.

[Vel]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

Personally I couldn't care less who wins a jock match on a college football field but I'd like to find out what happened in Benghazi. Democrats thought it was awfully important to find out what Nixon knew about a 3rd rate burglary at the Watergate hotel but they don't care about the death of a US Ambassador and three others including two Veteran Navy Seals. Hillary said she took "responsibility" for the lack of security but she really didn't. President Hussein said he takes responsibility for the lie that the administration promoted to cover their criminal negligence but he didn't mean it either. The cover up used to be worse than the crime but maybe not when a democrat is covering up criminal negligence and perjury.

And have mercy at the amount of effort they spent in trying to find out who outed a CIA agent to a reporter.

 

[idb]

It's just one outrage after another.

 

[blackhawk]

I would have preferred the Benghazi attack never happened and all four men were still alive and well but since it did happen and the four men were murdered I would like to know how and why this happened and why security was so lax especially in the middle east and in Libya where there was no real government or security from the locals and on the anniversary of 9-11 no less I happen to think this is important but hey that's just me.

 

[courseofhistory]

The majority of Americans are more worried about power and grocery bills, healthcare, the border, crime, car trouble, education, roads crumbling, disaster prep/relief.

We vote for representatives....to REPRESENT us. The GOP reps aren't representing the wishes of most Americans. They're expending all their energy chasing a topic that, right or wrong, is NOT a big concern for most Americans.

Its almost like the GOP wants to get a head-start on their 2014 and 2016 losses. Well....they're off and running!

Trust me. It's WRONG and they are wrong!

 

[Lakhota]

Benghaaaaazi...

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

No one but democrats wonder how they won. I'll tell you how obama won, it was because free loading bitches like you that gave obama the win

 

[Avatar4321]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

Yeah. Why the heck would we want to find out why the Administration purposely lied about the murder of our Ambassador? I mean I am sure they had some good reason. We should just blindly trust them instead of fulfill our responsibility as citizens and find out the truth.

 

[Claudette]

Its pretty easy really.

The supporters of that fuck in the WH don't want to hear or believe that he and that pack of boobs he surrounds himself with are as incompetant as they really are. Uncaring as well. Whats four lives against Barrry's reelection campaign? Nada in their eyes.

Of course he reelection was way more important that three men fighting for their lives in a seven hour gun battle. The fact that Barry had no problem leaving the whole thing behind and winging his way to Vegas for a fundraiser should raise a few eyebrows. Even among his staunch supporters.

Kinda sucks when you support someone that incompetant who certainly doesn't care that four good men are dead because of that incompetance and that wish for reelection.

 

[Sarah G]

The theory is now that the reason they are so against the Rice nomination is that the second name floated for the position is John Kerry. They want John Kerry to get it so they'll have another special election in Massachusettes for his senate seat and they will get Scott Brown back in.

She is going to be confirmed and these three particular GOPers are too stupid to convince anyone to side with them.

 

[RosieS]

Its pretty easy really.

The supporters of that fuck in the WH don't want to hear or believe that he and that pack of boobs he surrounds himself with are as incompetant as they really are. Uncaring as well. Whats four lives against Barrry's reelection campaign? Nada in their eyes.

Of course he reelection was way more important that three men fighting for their lives in a seven hour gun battle. The fact that Barry had no problem leaving the whole thing behind and winging his way to Vegas for a fundraiser should raise a few eyebrows. Even among his staunch supporters.

Kinda sucks when you support someone that incompetant who certainly doesn't care that four good men are dead because of that incompetance and that wish for reelection.

BREAKING: Ronald Reagan refuses to call embassy attack an "act of terror"

This is unacceptable. On December 12th(1983), our U.S. embassy in Kuwait was attackedby a suicidetruck bomber. This blatant act of terror killed 5 people. Yet, the weak willed President Reagan refuses to call it an Act of Terror.

Here's what happened:

On December 12, 1983, a truck laden with 45 large cylinders of gas connected to plastic explosives broke through the front gates of the American Embassy in Kuwait City and rammed into the embassy's three-story administrative annex, demolishing half the structure. The shock blew out windows and doors in distant homes and shops.

The pitifully limp response from the Reagan White House below:

First of all, he never even put out an official statement condemning the act. His first public response to the act was a MEDIA interview with the New York Daily News when asked about it. No where in that interview does he call the incident an "act of terror". Sure, he talks generically about "world wide terrorism", but it isn't clear if he's talking about Kuwait or the previous Lebanon bombings from earlier in the year.

He didn't make any more public statements until two days later he was again asked aboutthe incident. He again refused to even mention the word "terror".

Q. Mr. President, your Secretary of Defense has said that Syria sponsored and directed the attack against the U.S. marines in October. And many officials in your administration have said privately that Iran has been behind attacks in Kuwait and in Lebanon. My question, sir, is: Are we going to retaliate against the Governments of Syria or Iran?

The President. No. We have taken a position -- and it is our policy that if this continues -- we're not there to shoot first or to enter into combat.ButI'm nevergoing to send ourmenanyplace where they wouldn't be allowed to defend themselves. And it's been our policy that if they are attacked, they will defend.

Later that day he gave a speech and Q&A session to a group of Newspaper editors. In it, he doesn't even MENTION the incident. Obviously, there is some kind of cover-up going on. Worse, in the Q&A no one asked him about the incident. The corporate media was obviously in on the cover-up.

There was no further public statements by the president on the incident until on Dec 27th. Here, he only referred to it as an "act of violence":

The thrust of the history of this country is that we've recognized a clear distinction between being at peace with other states and being at war. We have never before faced a situation in which others routinely sponsor and facilitate acts of violence against us while hiding behind proxies and surrogates which claim -- they claim they do not fully control.

Now, this problem is not unique to Lebanon. We've seen the ugly manifestation in Kuwait, the terrorist bombing in Rangoon, the senseless murder of Turkish diplomats, the attackon thePope, the bombing of our own Capitol, and on the streets of London.

Note that he called the bombing in Rangoon a "terrorist" bombing, but could only bring himself to call the Kuwait attack an "ugly manifestation". WHAT THE HELL does that mean, Mr. President!?

I checked all of the presidents public statements for the rest of the month. He never addressed the incident again that month. I'm not sure that he EVER specifically called it an "act of terror". He called other embassy attacks as a "terrorist bombing". Why wouldn't he do it for this one?

Obviously, President Reagan has gone soft. We cannot re-elect this man. He's forgotten how to keep us safe.

Hope you enjoyed reading this parody of right-wing bullshit.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/
10/19/1147106/-Breaking-Ronald-Reagan-refuses-to-call-embassy-attack-an-act-of-
terror

Regards from Rosie

 

[Sarah G]

Its pretty easy really.

The supporters of that fuck in the WH don't want to hear or believe that he and that pack of boobs he surrounds himself with are as incompetant as they really are. Uncaring as well. Whats four lives against Barrry's reelection campaign? Nada in their eyes.

Of course he reelection was way more important that three men fighting for their lives in a seven hour gun battle. The fact that Barry had no problem leaving the whole thing behind and winging his way to Vegas for a fundraiser should raise a few eyebrows. Even among his staunch supporters.

Kinda sucks when you support someone that incompetant who certainly doesn't care that four good men are dead because of that incompetance and that wish for reelection.

BREAKING: Ronald Reagan refuses to call embassy attack an "act of terror"

This is unacceptable. On December 12th(1983), our U.S. embassy in Kuwait was attackedby a suicidetruck bomber. This blatant act of terror killed 5 people. Yet, the weak willed President Reagan refuses to call it an Act of Terror.

Here's what happened:

On December 12, 1983, a truck laden with 45 large cylinders of gas connected to plastic explosives broke through the front gates of the American Embassy in Kuwait City and rammed into the embassy's three-story administrative annex, demolishing half the structure. The shock blew out windows and doors in distant homes and shops.

The pitifully limp response from the Reagan White House below:

First of all, he never even put out an official statement condemning the act. His first public response to the act was a MEDIA interview with the New York Daily News when asked about it. No where in that interview does he call the incident an "act of terror". Sure, he talks generically about "world wide terrorism", but it isn't clear if he's talking about Kuwait or the previous Lebanon bombings from earlier in the year.

He didn't make any more public statements until two days later he was again asked aboutthe incident. He again refused to even mention the word "terror".

Q. Mr. President, your Secretary of Defense has said that Syria sponsored and directed the attack against the U.S. marines in October. And many officials in your administration have said privately that Iran has been behind attacks in Kuwait and in Lebanon. My question, sir, is: Are we going to retaliate against the Governments of Syria or Iran?

The President. No. We have taken a position -- and it is our policy that if this continues -- we're not there to shoot first or to enter into combat.ButI'm nevergoing to send ourmenanyplace where they wouldn't be allowed to defend themselves. And it's been our policy that if they are attacked, they will defend.

Later that day he gave a speech and Q&A session to a group of Newspaper editors. In it, he doesn't even MENTION the incident. Obviously, there is some kind of cover-up going on. Worse, in the Q&A no one asked him about the incident. The corporate media was obviously in on the cover-up.

There was no further public statements by the president on the incident until on Dec 27th. Here, he only referred to it as an "act of violence":

The thrust of the history of this country is that we've recognized a clear distinction between being at peace with other states and being at war. We have never before faced a situation in which others routinely sponsor and facilitate acts of violence against us while hiding behind proxies and surrogates which claim -- they claim they do not fully control.

Now, this problem is not unique to Lebanon. We've seen the ugly manifestation in Kuwait, the terrorist bombing in Rangoon, the senseless murder of Turkish diplomats, the attackon thePope, the bombing of our own Capitol, and on the streets of London.

Note that he called the bombing in Rangoon a "terrorist" bombing, but could only bring himself to call the Kuwait attack an "ugly manifestation". WHAT THE HELL does that mean, Mr. President!?

I checked all of the presidents public statements for the rest of the month. He never addressed the incident again that month. I'm not sure that he EVER specifically called it an "act of terror". He called other embassy attacks as a "terrorist bombing". Why wouldn't he do it for this one?

Obviously, President Reagan has gone soft. We cannot re-elect this man. He's forgotten how to keep us safe.

Hope you enjoyed reading this parody of right-wing bullshit.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/
10/19/1147106/-Breaking-Ronald-Reagan-refuses-to-call-embassy-attack-an-act-of-
terror

Regards from Rosie

Nice one.

 

[Claudette]

Its pretty easy really.

The supporters of that fuck in the WH don't want to hear or believe that he and that pack of boobs he surrounds himself with are as incompetant as they really are. Uncaring as well. Whats four lives against Barrry's reelection campaign? Nada in their eyes.

Of course he reelection was way more important that three men fighting for their lives in a seven hour gun battle. The fact that Barry had no problem leaving the whole thing behind and winging his way to Vegas for a fundraiser should raise a few eyebrows. Even among his staunch supporters.

Kinda sucks when you support someone that incompetant who certainly doesn't care that four good men are dead because of that incompetance and that wish for reelection.

BREAKING: Ronald Reagan refuses to call embassy attack an "act of terror"

This is unacceptable. On December 12th(1983), our U.S. embassy in Kuwait was attackedby a suicidetruck bomber. This blatant act of terror killed 5 people. Yet, the weak willed President Reagan refuses to call it an Act of Terror.

Here's what happened:

On December 12, 1983, a truck laden with 45 large cylinders of gas connected to plastic explosives broke through the front gates of the American Embassy in Kuwait City and rammed into the embassy's three-story administrative annex, demolishing half the structure. The shock blew out windows and doors in distant homes and shops.

The pitifully limp response from the Reagan White House below:

First of all, he never even put out an official statement condemning the act. His first public response to the act was a MEDIA interview with the New York Daily News when asked about it. No where in that interview does he call the incident an "act of terror". Sure, he talks generically about "world wide terrorism", but it isn't clear if he's talking about Kuwait or the previous Lebanon bombings from earlier in the year.

He didn't make any more public statements until two days later he was again asked aboutthe incident. He again refused to even mention the word "terror".

Q. Mr. President, your Secretary of Defense has said that Syria sponsored and directed the attack against the U.S. marines in October. And many officials in your administration have said privately that Iran has been behind attacks in Kuwait and in Lebanon. My question, sir, is: Are we going to retaliate against the Governments of Syria or Iran?

The President. No. We have taken a position -- and it is our policy that if this continues -- we're not there to shoot first or to enter into combat.ButI'm nevergoing to send ourmenanyplace where they wouldn't be allowed to defend themselves. And it's been our policy that if they are attacked, they will defend.

Later that day he gave a speech and Q&A session to a group of Newspaper editors. In it, he doesn't even MENTION the incident. Obviously, there is some kind of cover-up going on. Worse, in the Q&A no one asked him about the incident. The corporate media was obviously in on the cover-up.

There was no further public statements by the president on the incident until on Dec 27th. Here, he only referred to it as an "act of violence":

The thrust of the history of this country is that we've recognized a clear distinction between being at peace with other states and being at war. We have never before faced a situation in which others routinely sponsor and facilitate acts of violence against us while hiding behind proxies and surrogates which claim -- they claim they do not fully control.

Now, this problem is not unique to Lebanon. We've seen the ugly manifestation in Kuwait, the terrorist bombing in Rangoon, the senseless murder of Turkish diplomats, the attackon thePope, the bombing of our own Capitol, and on the streets of London.

Note that he called the bombing in Rangoon a "terrorist" bombing, but could only bring himself to call the Kuwait attack an "ugly manifestation". WHAT THE HELL does that mean, Mr. President!?

I checked all of the presidents public statements for the rest of the month. He never addressed the incident again that month. I'm not sure that he EVER specifically called it an "act of terror". He called other embassy attacks as a "terrorist bombing". Why wouldn't he do it for this one?

Obviously, President Reagan has gone soft. We cannot re-elect this man. He's forgotten how to keep us safe.

Hope you enjoyed reading this parody of right-wing bullshit.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/
10/19/1147106/-Breaking-Ronald-Reagan-refuses-to-call-embassy-attack-an-act-of-
terror

Regards from Rosie

Op is about Benghazi and that fuck in the WH.

Deflect much??

Regard Claudette from Melbourne.

 

[Freewill]

I watched Susan Collins go on and on about Obama. She said he wanted a "clean win" in Libya so he suppressed this story to try to get it.

Such a stupid thing to say.

First, has Obama ever mentioned "win" of any kind in Libya?

Second, only a tard could believe in this age of the Internet, the president could hide such a big story.

Third, Republicans are making themselves look even more ridiculous by the hour.

McCain wanted to unilaterally go stampeding into Libya with troops and the whole shebang.

I wonder how many casualties that would have resulted in.

You have repeated this several times, do you have a link to back this up? I am guess what you are saying is that it is better to leave civilians in Libya almost undefended then to send in troops that could defend themselves? That is if what you are saying is true, sometimes I have found that the liberal memory isn't always very good.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

You don't give a fuck when first responders are murdered by terrorists.

Noted.

 

[Jarhead]

I would have preferred the Benghazi attack never happened and all four men were still alive and well but since it did happen and the four men were murdered I would like to know how and why this happened and why security was so lax especially in the middle east and in Libya where there was no real government or security from the locals and on the anniversary of 9-11 no less I happen to think this is important but hey that's just me.

It is imporetant. Very important. If it is duye tpo a lack of communication, we need to know so it wont happen again. If it is due to tampering of reports, we need to know so it wont hapopen again. If it is due to incompetency, we need to know so it wont happen again.

Why is the GOP is pushing the issue? Perhaps for political expediency. But at least they are asking for answrers.

But the bigger question is this....why are the democrats NOT interested in pushing the issue and finding out what happened?

 

[konradv]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

You don't give a fuck when first responders are murdered by terrorists.

Noted.

Bashing Obama when 4 die, but cheered Bush when 3,000 did!

NOTED

 

[Jarhead]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

You don't give a fuck when first responders are murdered by terrorists.

Noted.

Bashing Obama when 4 die, but cheered Bush when 3,000 did!

NOTED

Bush?

Dont you mean congress?

They are the ones who voted for the war.

 

[Freewill]

Its so bizarre watching right wingers just salivate and desperately keep pushing "BEEEEEANGHAZI!!!".

Did the President do wrong, or right, or lie, or not???

I personally dont give a fuck. Im more worried about paying my bills this month, and who wins the Alabama vs Georgia game Saturday.

But still interesting, to see the GOP keep pushing with all their might on an issue that, really, has no impact on the daily lives of 99.9% of Americans, rather than put all that energy into solving some of the real problems affecting the average American.

It would almost make one think that solving problems facing average Americans is LESS important to them than.......just simply defeating Obama.

And they wonder why they lost.

We get it the left doesn't give a .... about the deaths of a gay man in Libya, we got it, your totally OK with it. No problem, but I must ask why don't you just move on? Why do you start threads trying to capitalize on the death of 4 Americans? Seems a bit disingenuous to start a thread accusing others of EXACTLY what you are doing.

We understand you worry more about your pay check then a failure on the administrations part to protect our people. I realize that your pay is more important then the administration admitting that they mislead the USA and the world.

But what I don't understand is why you think what Obama has done is better for your paycheck verses what anyone else might have done. Have you bought gasoline lately? Have you bought food lately? Consider you start a thread about something you don't care about how about we talk about the largest tax increase in history, Obamatax, which will directly effect you pocketbook?

How about we talk about that instead of the needless deaths of our men in Libya would that make you happier?

 

[Seawytch]

I would have preferred the Benghazi attack never happened and all four men were still alive and well but since it did happen and the four men were murdered I would like to know how and why this happened and why security was so lax especially in the middle east and in Libya where there was no real government or security from the locals and on the anniversary of 9-11 no less I happen to think this is important but hey that's just me.

It is imporetant. Very important. If it is duye tpo a lack of communication, we need to know so it wont happen again. If it is due to tampering of reports, we need to know so it wont hapopen again. If it is due to incompetency, we need to know so it wont happen again.

Why is the GOP is pushing the issue? Perhaps for political expediency. But at least they are asking for answrers.

But the bigger question is this....why are the democrats NOT interested in pushing the issue and finding out what happened?

Ah, but we do...we just don't think it needs to be made into a witch hunt or political theater. Yes, investigate the security failures. Is that what Fox and the RW media is doing? No, they are floating ridiculous conspiracy theories like the President watched a video of the attack. Seriously?

It's too late to take anything seriously. Fox has made a mockery of the issue.

 

[konradv]

You don't give a fuck when first responders are murdered by terrorists.

Noted.

Bashing Obama when 4 die, but cheered Bush when 3,000 did!

NOTED

Bush?

Dont you mean congress?

They are the ones who voted for the war.

No I don't mean Congress, because I wasn't talking about war.