Thank god for Susan rice

[bodecea]

I wonder if the US Military has protocols for ignoring the President if he gets catastrophic national security advice?

If they do, it's a shame they didn't activate that protocol when told to invade Iraq.

 

[The Rabbi]

I wonder if the US Military has protocols for ignoring the President if he gets catastrophic national security advice?

If they do, it's a shame they didn't activate that protocol when told to invade Iraq.

Why would they? The measure to do so passed Congress with overwhelming bipartisan support.

 

[deltex1]

They're all stupid.

 

[tyroneweaver]

Congratulations to Susan Rice! Thank you, President Obama, for showing wingnuts who is really in charge of the country! Susan Rice was a great choice for National Security Adviser!

Too bad she wasn't National Security Adviser prior to 9/11 instead of Condi Rice.

ya then they could blame the planes crashing into the towers on a in flight movie

 

[tyroneweaver]

They're all stupid.

none of em are looking for the killer of Bob Krenze

 

[driveby]

They're all socialists........

 

[sitarro]

They're all socialists........

Sorry driveby, I believe the asshole in the bottom right corner is an avowed Communist.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

They're all socialists........

Sorry driveby, I believe the asshole in the bottom right corner is an avowed Communist.

And a 9/11 truther.

 

[Mertex]

You mean the same IRS that went after Liberal organizations when W was president? I guess it was okay, then!

Also, Democrats were the only ones DENIED approval.

You're not really pulling out that nonsense are ya? Some democrats were denied approval because they didn't fit the criteria. Republican groups did not have the chance to be denied or approved since they were being stonewalled and encumbered by different rules aimed to make their applications harder or impossible to pass simply because of their group's names. The IRS themselves said what they did was wrong. President Obama said he was outraged by what had happened. Stop spinning partisan nonsense that nobody outside the staff of Media Matters really buys.

The ones I was talking about did, but Bush didn't like what they were saying. And FYI, the Republican organizations that were being delayed ended up getting the 501(c)(4), and they are not really qualified because they are not "exclusively" welfare. They need to be stripped of the tax exemption and pay taxes like other political organizations.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Also, Democrats were the only ones DENIED approval.

You're not really pulling out that nonsense are ya? Some democrats were denied approval because they didn't fit the criteria. Republican groups did not have the chance to be denied or approved since they were being stonewalled and encumbered by different rules aimed to make their applications harder or impossible to pass simply because of their group's names. The IRS themselves said what they did was wrong. President Obama said he was outraged by what had happened. Stop spinning partisan nonsense that nobody outside the staff of Media Matters really buys.

The ones I was talking about did, but Bush didn't like what they were saying. And FYI, the Republican organizations that were being delayed ended up getting the 501(c)(4), and they are not really qualified because they are not "exclusively" welfare. They need to be stripped of the tax exemption and pay taxes like other political organizations.

Which ones are you talking about? I'm referring to your first sentence. Please specify.
The Republican organizations that were being delayed ended up getting the 501s? All of them? Some of them? One of them?
They are not really qualified because they are not "exclusively" welfare? Can you give me a name? Seriously, I have no problem with opinions. We all have them. When, however, you state something as a fact it would be nice to show me what you're talking about.
FYI, the IRS already said they should not have targeted conservative groups.
FYI, Pres, Obama said he was outraged by what the IRS has done.
FYI, yes, we all know that the far left have never exactly loved the whole freedom of speech concept but don't you think defending a corrupt IRS targeting political rivals is a bit much, even for the left?

 

[The Rabbi]

You can pretty well dismiss the post by Mertex because it contains the standard left wing arguments: They all do it, Boosh!. Any post that contains that or "Sept was a long time ago" or "at this point what difference does it make" isn't really worth responding to. We aren't discussing Bush. We're discussing the most corrupt regime and the worst president since Baby Doc Duvalier.

 

[BlindBoo]

I'm not sure the word "opinion" means what you think it means.

Well since your first sentence was basically a well used parroted lie, as the points went through several revisions and only scrubbed of a few particular pieces of information. In the second sentence your opinion of Ambassador Rice came across loud and clear that she is an easily used blithering idiot.

The difference in the reaction to the 9-11-2001 attacks and the 9-11 Benghazi attack is stunning. In 2001 Democrats and Republicans came together and asked what can we do to help. In 2012 all the Republicans could think of is how can we hurt President Obama's chances for re-election! Even as the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known, the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the President.

The points were scrubbed 12 times. This is not a debatable point. One can debate on why the points were scrubbed but not the fact that they were scrubbed 12 times. When the spokesman for Obama, Jay Carney, said there was only one tiny little change made in the talking points, he was either lying or he is a blithering idiot. Since Obama did not correct Carney then Obama is either manipulating a lie or a blithering idiot. I find it odd that I have more confidence in the intelligence of Obama and Rice and Carney than you do. You simply believe them to be morons. I give them more credit.
You say that the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known". They were known however. Hence all the scrubbing from the original talking points. The evidence of who attacked Benghazi was available about an hour or so after the attack. This is evidenced by all the scrubbing of who actually attacked Benghazi.
You also point out that the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the president. Why did you leave out the fact that the Republican candidate was right? Why do facts and evidence have no meaning for you?

Because he wasn't. The tweet put out by embassy personnel was sent 4 hours before the crowds attacked the embassy in Cairo and long before the attack on the consulate building in Benghazi. Here is the first statement put out by the administration after the attack in Benghazi was known.

Statement on the Attack in Benghazi

"I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack."

Furthermore....White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a quote from President Obama that said, "I think most Americans, Democrats or Republicans, understand that there are times where we set politics aside, and one of those is when we've got a direct threat to American personnel who are overseas. And so I think that if you look at how most Republicans have reacted, most elected officials, they've reacted responsibly, waiting to find out the facts before they talked, making sure that our number-one priority is the safety and security of American personnel.

"It appears that Governor Romney didn’t have his facts right," Obama told an interviewer from 60 Minutes. "The situation in Cairo was one in which an embassy that is being threatened by major protests releases a press release saying that the film that had disturbed so many Muslims around the world wasn’t representative of what Americans believe about Islam, in an effort to cool the situation down. It didn’t come from me, it didn’t come from Secretary Clinton; it came from folks on the ground who are potentially in danger. And my tendency is to cut folks a little bit of slack when they're in that circumstance, rather than try to question their judgment from the comfort of a campaign office."

PolitiFact | Did the U.S. embassy in Cairo make an apology?

 

[Ava]

If anyone doubted Obamas arrogance; this appointment was a 'fart in your face'!

I wish I had saved a post I made here within the last two years, about Obama: "may his arrogance bury him." His chickens have come home to roost.

 

[Sallow]

You can pretty well dismiss the post by Mertex because it contains the standard left wing arguments: They all do it, Boosh!. Any post that contains that or "Sept was a long time ago" or "at this point what difference does it make" isn't really worth responding to. We aren't discussing Bush. We're discussing the most corrupt regime and the worst president since Baby Doc Duvalier.

Ah. That clears it up.

We are discussing Reagan.

 

[Sallow]

We now know the approved media talking points were scrubbed 12 times of all accurate information. It seems the only defense of Rice is that she is an easily used blithering idiot.

Actually no.

We don't all "know" that.

We weren't in the room.

What we do know is that there may have been a turf war between the CIA and the state department.

And we also know that various law enforcement agencies were worried about compromising the investigation by putting out to much information.

We also know that it was corrected after 3 days.

How long did it take to correct the "incorrect" information about Iraq?

Huh?

Let me rephrase, people who read and follow politics know that the media talking points were scrubbed 12 times. The reason for the scrubbing could be considered an opinion but not the fact that it was scrubbed.

"How long did it take to correct the "incorrect" information about Iraq?". Are you suggesting it's ok to lie to the american people because you think Bush lied to the american people? Because you think Bush lied to the american people then it's ok for other presidents and their subordinates to lie? Is this really the corrupt mentality we are forced to endure as a way to defend the indefensible?

Because I "think" he lied?

No he lied. Definitely lied. He told a whopper in the SOTU despite the FACT the CIA explicitly told him NOT to include. He put it in anyway. And changed the source of the intel.

THAT'S LYING.

What happened with Benghazi WAS NOT LYING. At least on the part of the state department. The CIA? Yeah..they lied. They always lie. That's their job.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Well since your first sentence was basically a well used parroted lie, as the points went through several revisions and only scrubbed of a few particular pieces of information. In the second sentence your opinion of Ambassador Rice came across loud and clear that she is an easily used blithering idiot.

The difference in the reaction to the 9-11-2001 attacks and the 9-11 Benghazi attack is stunning. In 2001 Democrats and Republicans came together and asked what can we do to help. In 2012 all the Republicans could think of is how can we hurt President Obama's chances for re-election! Even as the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known, the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the President.

The points were scrubbed 12 times. This is not a debatable point. One can debate on why the points were scrubbed but not the fact that they were scrubbed 12 times. When the spokesman for Obama, Jay Carney, said there was only one tiny little change made in the talking points, he was either lying or he is a blithering idiot. Since Obama did not correct Carney then Obama is either manipulating a lie or a blithering idiot. I find it odd that I have more confidence in the intelligence of Obama and Rice and Carney than you do. You simply believe them to be morons. I give them more credit.
You say that the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known". They were known however. Hence all the scrubbing from the original talking points. The evidence of who attacked Benghazi was available about an hour or so after the attack. This is evidenced by all the scrubbing of who actually attacked Benghazi.
You also point out that the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the president. Why did you leave out the fact that the Republican candidate was right? Why do facts and evidence have no meaning for you?

Because he wasn't. The tweet put out by embassy personnel was sent 4 hours before the crowds attacked the embassy in Cairo and long before the attack on the consulate building in Benghazi. Here is the first statement put out by the administration after the attack in Benghazi was known.

Statement on the Attack in Benghazi

"I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack."

Furthermore....White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a quote from President Obama that said, "I think most Americans, Democrats or Republicans, understand that there are times where we set politics aside, and one of those is when we've got a direct threat to American personnel who are overseas. And so I think that if you look at how most Republicans have reacted, most elected officials, they've reacted responsibly, waiting to find out the facts before they talked, making sure that our number-one priority is the safety and security of American personnel.

"It appears that Governor Romney didn’t have his facts right," Obama told an interviewer from 60 Minutes. "The situation in Cairo was one in which an embassy that is being threatened by major protests releases a press release saying that the film that had disturbed so many Muslims around the world wasn’t representative of what Americans believe about Islam, in an effort to cool the situation down. It didn’t come from me, it didn’t come from Secretary Clinton; it came from folks on the ground who are potentially in danger. And my tendency is to cut folks a little bit of slack when they're in that circumstance, rather than try to question their judgment from the comfort of a campaign office."

PolitiFact | Did the U.S. embassy in Cairo make an apology?

your evidence that Romney was wrong is that Obama said so? Are you kidding me? Is this the part where I quote Rush Limbaugh to prove that OBAMA was wrong? I love the tactics of the left. Evidence would suggest that Obama played politics with Behnghazi so when republicans point this out it is because republicans are playing politics with Behnghazi. The left is really scraping the bottom of the justification barrel.

 

[Claudette]

The points were scrubbed 12 times. This is not a debatable point. One can debate on why the points were scrubbed but not the fact that they were scrubbed 12 times. When the spokesman for Obama, Jay Carney, said there was only one tiny little change made in the talking points, he was either lying or he is a blithering idiot. Since Obama did not correct Carney then Obama is either manipulating a lie or a blithering idiot. I find it odd that I have more confidence in the intelligence of Obama and Rice and Carney than you do. You simply believe them to be morons. I give them more credit.
You say that the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known". They were known however. Hence all the scrubbing from the original talking points. The evidence of who attacked Benghazi was available about an hour or so after the attack. This is evidenced by all the scrubbing of who actually attacked Benghazi.
You also point out that the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the president. Why did you leave out the fact that the Republican candidate was right? Why do facts and evidence have no meaning for you?

Because he wasn't. The tweet put out by embassy personnel was sent 4 hours before the crowds attacked the embassy in Cairo and long before the attack on the consulate building in Benghazi. Here is the first statement put out by the administration after the attack in Benghazi was known.

Statement on the Attack in Benghazi

"I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack."

Furthermore....White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a quote from President Obama that said, "I think most Americans, Democrats or Republicans, understand that there are times where we set politics aside, and one of those is when we've got a direct threat to American personnel who are overseas. And so I think that if you look at how most Republicans have reacted, most elected officials, they've reacted responsibly, waiting to find out the facts before they talked, making sure that our number-one priority is the safety and security of American personnel.

"It appears that Governor Romney didn’t have his facts right," Obama told an interviewer from 60 Minutes. "The situation in Cairo was one in which an embassy that is being threatened by major protests releases a press release saying that the film that had disturbed so many Muslims around the world wasn’t representative of what Americans believe about Islam, in an effort to cool the situation down. It didn’t come from me, it didn’t come from Secretary Clinton; it came from folks on the ground who are potentially in danger. And my tendency is to cut folks a little bit of slack when they're in that circumstance, rather than try to question their judgment from the comfort of a campaign office."

PolitiFact | Did the U.S. embassy in Cairo make an apology?

your evidence that Romney was wrong is that Obama said so? Are you kidding me? Is this the part where I quote Rush Limbaugh to prove that OBAMA was wrong? I love the tactics of the left. Evidence would suggest that Obama played politics with Behnghazi so when republicans point this out it is because republicans are playing politics with Behnghazi. The left is really scraping the bottom of the justification barrel.

You bet. The State Department had all kinds of warning of an attack and did absofuckinglutely nothing about it.

Rice lied her ass off about a video.

There were no demonstrations in Benghazi. It was a straighup attack to coincide with 9-11.

Barry boy jetted off to his fundraiser while HIS ambassador and three other very good men were dying in Benghazi. We all know what his priorities were and they sure as shit weren't four dead men and a consulate under attack.

That should tell anyone with half a brain everything they need to know about Obama.

 

[JohnL.Burke]

Actually no.

We don't all "know" that.

We weren't in the room.

What we do know is that there may have been a turf war between the CIA and the state department.

And we also know that various law enforcement agencies were worried about compromising the investigation by putting out to much information.

We also know that it was corrected after 3 days.

How long did it take to correct the "incorrect" information about Iraq?

Huh?

Let me rephrase, people who read and follow politics know that the media talking points were scrubbed 12 times. The reason for the scrubbing could be considered an opinion but not the fact that it was scrubbed.

"How long did it take to correct the "incorrect" information about Iraq?". Are you suggesting it's ok to lie to the american people because you think Bush lied to the american people? Because you think Bush lied to the american people then it's ok for other presidents and their subordinates to lie? Is this really the corrupt mentality we are forced to endure as a way to defend the indefensible?

Because I "think" he lied?

No he lied. Definitely lied. He told a whopper in the SOTU despite the FACT the CIA explicitly told him NOT to include. He put it in anyway. And changed the source of the intel.

THAT'S LYING.

What happened with Benghazi WAS NOT LYING. At least on the part of the state department. The CIA? Yeah..they lied. They always lie. That's their job.

What seems to be your definition of a lie always seems convenient and contrived. I prefer sticking with a dictionary.FactCheck.org: Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying

 

[BlindBoo]

The points were scrubbed 12 times. This is not a debatable point. One can debate on why the points were scrubbed but not the fact that they were scrubbed 12 times. When the spokesman for Obama, Jay Carney, said there was only one tiny little change made in the talking points, he was either lying or he is a blithering idiot. Since Obama did not correct Carney then Obama is either manipulating a lie or a blithering idiot. I find it odd that I have more confidence in the intelligence of Obama and Rice and Carney than you do. You simply believe them to be morons. I give them more credit.
You say that the full extent of the anti-American demonstrations, riots, and attacks were not yet known". They were known however. Hence all the scrubbing from the original talking points. The evidence of who attacked Benghazi was available about an hour or so after the attack. This is evidenced by all the scrubbing of who actually attacked Benghazi.
You also point out that the Republican candidate was using the attacks to launch political attacks on the president. Why did you leave out the fact that the Republican candidate was right? Why do facts and evidence have no meaning for you?

Because he wasn't. The tweet put out by embassy personnel was sent 4 hours before the crowds attacked the embassy in Cairo and long before the attack on the consulate building in Benghazi. Here is the first statement put out by the administration after the attack in Benghazi was known.

Statement on the Attack in Benghazi

"I condemn in the strongest terms the attack on our mission in Benghazi today. As we work to secure our personnel and facilities, we have confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed. We are heartbroken by this terrible loss. Our thoughts and prayers are with his family and those who have suffered in this attack."

Furthermore....White House Press Secretary Jay Carney released a quote from President Obama that said, "I think most Americans, Democrats or Republicans, understand that there are times where we set politics aside, and one of those is when we've got a direct threat to American personnel who are overseas. And so I think that if you look at how most Republicans have reacted, most elected officials, they've reacted responsibly, waiting to find out the facts before they talked, making sure that our number-one priority is the safety and security of American personnel.

"It appears that Governor Romney didn’t have his facts right," Obama told an interviewer from 60 Minutes. "The situation in Cairo was one in which an embassy that is being threatened by major protests releases a press release saying that the film that had disturbed so many Muslims around the world wasn’t representative of what Americans believe about Islam, in an effort to cool the situation down. It didn’t come from me, it didn’t come from Secretary Clinton; it came from folks on the ground who are potentially in danger. And my tendency is to cut folks a little bit of slack when they're in that circumstance, rather than try to question their judgment from the comfort of a campaign office."

PolitiFact | Did the U.S. embassy in Cairo make an apology?

your evidence that Romney was wrong is that Obama said so? Are you kidding me? Is this the part where I quote Rush Limbaugh to prove that OBAMA was wrong? I love the tactics of the left. Evidence would suggest that Obama played politics with Behnghazi so when republicans point this out it is because republicans are playing politics with Behnghazi. The left is really scraping the bottom of the justification barrel.

The first statement put out by the WH was the first quote I posted and that is what proved Romney was factually wrong in his first statement. The quote from the President is why he was wrong politically. That was one of many missteps Romney made that proved to Americans he was not fit to be president.