Abraham Lincoln said, “You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.” President Obama, take heed.
The Benghazi, Libya terrorist attack on September 11 is growing into quite a scandal for the current administration. It appears the attempted “cover-up” or public spin may, as usual, be more deplorable than the attack on our soil and our citizens in Libya.
The death of four brave Americans serving our country was certainly horrible, but the lack of candor, stalling and lack of truth-telling by the Obama administration has been appalling. The apparent blame, which is now being assigned to the “intelligence community,” is indeed a farce. Americans expect nothing less than the truth from our nationally elected officials and their appointed bureaucrats.
American credibility is being questioned all over the world, especially in Middle Eastern and African nations where terrorist elements are presently planning and training to attack America again and again.
The lack of factual, timely and verifiable evidence about the attack in Benghazi by the American press is deplorable. I looked exhaustively in the first section of the Washington Post on October 14, as well as the editorial page and found no outrage expressed concerning the Benghazi attack. The stone walling of investigations, misstatements, and ludicrous comments made by administration officials to the press continue.
In his farewell address, President Dwight Eisenhower warned of the “military industrial complex.” Perhaps today there is a need to heed that warning and take serious steps to examine the White House press, or should I say cabal. Hearings have been held about automobile company bailouts, bank and mortgage failures. How about hearings on the responsibilities of the press?
Investigations will be launched by various agencies and organizations to uncover the truth regarding the Benghazi terrorist attack. Unfortunately, the result of these myriad investigations will probably not be available to the voting public until after the November 6 election. Politics as usual.
Even though economics remains the predominate issue in the 2012 election, Americans cannot ignore the total collapse of the administration’s foreign policy, culminating with the death of the four Americans in Libya. Mr. President, this attack was on your watch. The lack of preparedness, safety, and aftermath of the event are your responsibility. The buck stops in the Oval Office. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton may have accepted accountability of the security for all United States missions around the world, but the ultimate responsibility is that of the President of the United States.
As I go to the voting booth on November 6, Benghazi will be on my mind. Our losses and failures will be on my mind. The families of the four lost Americans will be on my mind. The lack of any coherent foreign policy will be on my mind.
Mr. President your term deserves to come to an end, along with that of “Chuckles,“ your vice president. Neither of you appears to have an accurate nor creditable foreign policy. For the President of the United States, job one is the protection of American citizens at home and abroad.
With Benghazi, and many other issues on my mind, I will vote for Mitt Romney.
By Fletcher Hall
DLaMotte says
What is deplorable is the rediculous attempt to make the issue some “Watergate” scandal. Please. Bully for you that you think you can discredit
some part of President Obama’s foreign policy, and so close to November, no less. Very desperate of you. However, any part of a military/diplomatic
Mission is inherently risky. The facts are being persued and I have no doubt all facts will be made public.
One last comment. The thought of that imperious, short tempered Republican nominee handling our foreign policy….now that is frightening.
Joel Brandes says
“OH WHAT A TANGLED WEB WE WEAVE, WHEN FIRST WE PRACTICE TO DECEIVE”. Make no mistake about it. The White House is engaged in a massive attempt at deception. Are we to believe that information concerning the peril at our consulate, was not forwarded to the White House situation room? We are told that no matter where the president is, he is kept informed. Are we to believe, the situation room didn’t know where he was?
Stephan Sonn says
Cherry pick and spin all you like but you can’t take this into a problem of substance…bad PR….Maybe
gerry maynes says
Hi, The Pressident waited several weeks , when he realized that know one but you and Candy of C>N.N fame belived his fib. Could you imagtine if FDR took to the air waves on December 8 and siad the Japanese empire was upset over a movie staring Humprey Bogart where he fougth Japanese spys from stealing vital Military information and not swome act of war.
In fact this is worse then Watergate, because of our( Hail Obama) leaders actions our Amabasodor and two other Americans lost their lives
No one in Watergate died or got a paper cut that I know off.
Add his refusal to answer to congress iin Fast@ Furious another Obama classic that got a Border Patrol Agent and 40 Mexicans Killed and you see mthis is his MO. The he tosses Mrs Clinton under a Bus. ( What a great way to retain the female vote) What we have is a dishonest politican that will say and do any thing to retain his office. What a worm!!
Stephan Sonn says
Gerry sorry for the previous mispell of your name
michael V Johnson says
Amazing what fear and prejudice can do to the thought process. Worse than Watergate ? Be serious ! Did you apply the same scrutiny to bombing of the Marine barracks in 1983? Two hundred and forty one Americans died in that incident while Ronald Regan was president. In the aftermath Regan ordered the Marines to abandon the post and leave the country. Imagine if Obama did that. You would brand him a coward and a traitor. What about Sept. 1, 2001 when Bush ignored warning after warning and thousands died because he allowed us to be killed on our own soil ! Be real man ! The worst thing about paranoia, hatred and prejudice is when they take away you capacity for objective thinking, you are the last to know !
Stephan Sonn says
Benghazi was an act of terror and named such by our president
within 24 hours of it happening. He nailed it.
As for the way the State Department/press whims. spins,it was a messy choppy affair.
Fletcher, You know all that and your article is pure electioneering propaganda
at the expense of our country’s projection of reasoned foreign policy in dangerous times.
How long will it be before your you start chanting Heil Bain?
Joel Brandes says
Mr. Sonn, Have you actually listened to the entire Rose Garden speech? His exact words were, “ACTS OF TERROR” and did not refer dirctly to Benghazi. Obama is clutching at straws to divert attention from all of his diplomatic failures. Don’t try to blame it on Hillary. As secretary of State, her job is to follow his foreign policies.
Will you be joining Obama in bowing to the Saudi King?
Fletcher Hall says
Me thinks Mr. Sonn protests to loudly.
While the economy remains job one, foreign policy, or the lack thereof, along with immigration are also on the front burner for this election.
America’s place in the everchanging world is waiting to be defined.
Stephan Sonn says
Do you actually believe what you say.
Romney cannot even define himself
let alone global policy.
Stephan Sonn says
An act of terror in the current environment
ls just one of many events of terror.
Obama said terror, not protest.
You do not need to be an expert
to grasp basic syntax, semantics or grammar
to frame the context of his words.
If you need to find the chef”s eyelash
in every cooked egg yolk
you might even be temped
to pluck one of your own.
gerry maynes says
Hey the last time I checked the State Department reports to the President. He is responsible period.
Joel Brandes says
One of the primary responsibilities of the president is the defense of the nation. That would include the diplomatic facilities that are considered American territory. In the White House is a watch center, run by the National Security Advisor. (A presidential appointee) Their sole mission is to gather intelligence from all government agencies and ambassadors. (that includes the State Department)
There were two prior attacks upon the consulate in Benghazi. An attack upon the British Ambassador caused him to leave. Likewise the Red Cross was forced to depart. One would think this would get the presidents attention. Making a speech is not a substitute for taking action. Throwing people under the bus, is not the type of action one would expect from a president.
Yes indeed, I am taking a position that could be considered political. However, truth has been sadly missing from today’s politics and it’s time to inject some truth into politics.
Stephan Sonn says
If the US embassy were abandoned you would blame Obama too.
Do you not think that Mr Stevens had that option?
or did he choose not to take it?
It was not in his character to abandon his post.
He was that dedicated and involved in his very personal way.
This is not a Watergate issue.
Just cheap politics and on the cheap security budgeting.
Maybe the same contrary motivations that mock
common sense realities set this all in motion
Blame Dale Issa and current Republicans
who would divide the country and cut the baby in half.
Yours is a T party script.
Don’t expect that it will intimidate thinking people so easily.
Fletcher Hall says
Please explian to me who is the Tea Party.
Is thst the one held in Chestertoen each year.
Does that party have a foreign policy?
Joel Brandes says
Mr. Sonn, I am not now, nor have I ever been a member of any Tea Party group. For your edification, the Tea Party is not a monolithic group. It is comprised of many groups, which I believe has only one thing in common. That is the dislike of the going on in Washington. If you take a look at the congressional approval rating, that is one thing the majority of Americans agree with. I have read where some of these groups are unhappy with establishment Republicans as much as they dislike the Democrats currently in power.
I believe, the answer to your question, Who is the Tea Party?, is that they are ordinary Americans that only wish to have a government that is responsive to the needs of the country, as a whole and not to the abundant special interest groups.
Fletcher Hall says
You are spot on.
One dead American in a foreign nation, on American soil is one too many.
Watch the administration continue to elongate the investigation.
Stephan Sonn says
And Fletcher
It is not enough to talk the talk
unless you walk the walk too.
Fletcher Hall says
I am walking the walk. All the way to the polls to vote for Gov. Romney.
Stephan Sonn says
I would not expect you to do any different than
vote for the candidate
that represents your interests best.
Stephan Sonn says
I was not referring to your voting
but to the moderation you often profess.
It has been my experience that
moderation is not just a behavior pattern
but is also a state of being and quality of mind.
I think that Aristotle called moderation the golden mean
joe diamond says
Don’t do it Fletcher,
Seems Donald Rumsfeld is on record giving Mitt an attaboy for pointing out the weakness in the Obama presidency based on the two recent embassy attacks you mentioned. BUT….during the reign of Bush the Younger there were twelve attacks around the world on American embassies……..eight while Rummy was Secretary………………so if you are only going to count embassy attacks and use that as a basis for voting….don’t do it.
Besides, the host country is responsible for the security of the embassies. Try attacking the Egyptian or Lybian embassy in Washington, D.C. You will find yourself riding around Washington until the D.C. P. D. , the Secret Service and the FBI decide where to dump you. It is the host countries who need the discussion and not our head of state.
But if you want to vote for the president with the least embassy attacks….pull the lever for President Obama.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Mr. Diamond; If you are not a seeker of the truth, you must favor a cover up. No one doubts that over the years, there have been many attacks on our facilities. What makes this different is that our ambassador and three others were murdered. Ambassador Stevens has been shown at the gate saying fairwell to a vistor, just prior to the attack, There was no mob visable. You evidently choose to ignore testimony given by state department officials, under oath, before the congress.
The convoluted statements from Obama and his advocates that it was a spontaneous attack and then, at the last debate, Obama claiming he said it was a terror attack the next day, should raise questions as to the reliabilty of anything coming from this administration. I am on a first name basis with a former carrer diplomat and retired ambassador. He has told me, he never was without a cadre of body guards in a country with no record of violence. I believe, if you care to look, you will find that the case at all of our foreign facilities.
“THERE IS SOMETHING ROTTEN IN DENMARK” And I might add, “IN WASHINGTON”.
joe diamond says
My point is that it is way too soon to sort out exactly what happened. In summary, early reports (CIA to Langly, VA) may have not had all information. Later reports could likewise have been subjected to spin by various observers. So it takes time to sort things out.
I haven’t read the State Department testimony. I’ll look……..but still feel this is not Pearl Harbor or Watergate level events we are examining.
Then there is White House spin. That is what they do. Different people looking at the same information will generate different interpretations. We had one “decider” who controlled what truths went out to the public…now we have another. It is always good to consider the source.
Regarding our diplomatic establishment, I don’t think ambassadors should be appointed just on the basis of political contributions. The position should not be a political spoil. Likewise career diplomats should be able to represent America regardless of the party in power. They should know the country to which they are posted and understand its’ culture without being an extension of the CIA.
And I wonder how effective diplomats can be if they are continually hauled around in bullet proof vans with armed guards. In Washington traffic is often stopped by Secret Service parades to move self important leaders around D.C. I would hope that is not the norm in other countries. But that is just me.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Mr. Diamond, If it were not for the fact that we will elect a president in 16 days, I would be in agreement with you. Watergate occured before the 1972 election, but it was hidden from the public until after the election. Would Nixon have won if the public knew before voting? That Sir, is our problem. We don’t know if our president is or is not, a liar.
Ambassadors and the entire State Department function to further the presidents foreign policy. Therefore, the president nominates and the senate confirms people he feels will follow his guidelines. ELECTIONS HAVE CONSEQUENCES. In the case of security in Libya, I have no doubt that Deputy secretary Lamb made the final decission to reduce security. However, I believe she acted under the guidlines established by the president. Something, I’m sure Obama would have second thoughts about.
Your last point about how effective a diplomat would be? Certainly more effective than a dead diplomat.
joe diamond says
Joel,
That is part of the debate. As the technology of communication improves I think the role of ambassador could safely become a political spoil. The real diplomacy can be conducted from domestic sites. The ambassador can have a function much like the greeter at the state line rest stops; smile and hand out maps. If there is even a slight chance of an attack the whole staff can chopper out and close the embassy.
Diplomatic immunity means protection from the laws and citizens of the host country. When this is no longer the case we pack the tent and leave.
What is being debated here is actually the definition diplomacy and the function of our embassies. One thing they cannot be is a military post or a haven for intelligence operatives. No amount of fortification will protect against a determined attack…….remember Siagon? Rescue missions can be difficult………..ask Jimmy Carter. You have to consider how effective or important diplomatic missions can be when under attack. Who do diplomats even address when the government of the host country is being changed by violent means……..as we tried to encourage in Iraq? Anyhow, we should not be discussing how much security the embassies should have but rather how quickly the staff can pack and leave, in my opinion.
For now we will have to just disagree on the need for diplomats to reflect the views of the current elected head of state. There is a need for some continuity in the positions we present to the world. As it is now many countries just wait out the next election in hopes of a different deal. Troops in the field, their families and especially their commanders have a right to expect this continuity.
You are correct about the consequences of the next election. Diplomats will not be a significant issue. The next president, whoever he is, will definitely nominate one or more new supreme court judges. That will be a true consequence of an election.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
Joe;
As I understand it, embassies function as a conduit for trade delegations, granting of visas and not much else, except if hosting parties is important. I agree that technology has made ambassadors obsolete. However, as a reward system for contributors it’s excellent. A title for life and perhaps a pension, it is hard to beat. Perhaps the other functions could be conducted at a rented desk in one of the host countries banks, thereby making the need for security minimal.
As niether you nor I can bring about this change, we are stuck with what we have. I fall back to the congressional approval arguement. If 90% of the country is unhappy with their performance and that does indicate some failure in leadership, change is indicated. Aside from the families who suffered a loss, Benghazi is only important as it relates to the presidents policies and if a cover up is being perpetrated. I firmly believe, the public has a right to know before they cast their votes. I am irked by the determined effort to conceal the facts until after the election.
Stephan Sonn says
I gather you are in complete agreement with yourself on all this.
Joel Brandes says
I would be remiss if I didn’t also point out that our generals and admirals are also political appointees. That applies equaly to our judges, though judges with lifetime appointments have been known to part with those that appointed them. I bring this up because I question the actions of Gen. David Petraous. His CIA station chief, in Libya, reported that the attack in Benghazi was a planned terrorist attack. Somehow that was twisted by the general into a spontaneus mob. As Winston Churchill said, “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the others.”
I might note, that Democrats once called him, “GENERAL BETRAYUS”
Joel Brandes says
Obama will have a public pension of $200,000 from the Feds and about $100,000 from Illinois. Much of it is invested in companies located in China. Best of all it is managed by a Cayman company. I ask you to post this as a reminder to your readers that sometimes the pot calls the kettle, well you know.
This only relates to Benghazi in that it is a warning to examine the facts, prior to reaching a conclusion that what one hears is the truth.
Gren Whitman says
That Hall plans to vote for Romney is hardly a surprise, but if he thinks his disjointed burblings are persuasive to anyone other than right-wing true believers, he’s whackier than his essay.
Fletcher Hall says
I find it rather interesting that there seems to be no Democrats who are willing to write their “burblings” in support of their incumbent presidential candidate. Suggests a lack of strong support to me.
Freedom of speech remains one of the pillars of our democracy.
Stephan Sonn says
Joe Diamond where are you… How about some help with these dragons ?
joe diamond says
I’m coming!
Fletcher snuck past me while I was composing a rant on why I should not get a parking ticket….it can wait.
So, first we all cool it or Happy Hour ends and we start nap time.
Then we limit Fletcher to no adjectives and make him underline his opinions and double underline what he presents as facts.
Then someone explain to Fletcher the difference between the Boston Tea Party (start with rebellion against the colonial administration of these colonial areas by England) and end with a political action group using the term as a buzz word. The Tea Party in Chestertown is somewhere in the middle. Use little words and speak slowly.
Then we could just look at the role of embassies and diplomatic traditions. In a college town I just know there are better presenters than myself so I’ll keep is simple.
Embassies of all nations are considered to be sovereign territory of the nation who sends the embassador to live in it. The guest country is expected to provide security for the exterior of the grounds. Ambassadors and their staff have diplomatic immunity and cannot be arrested or detained within the host country. They are expected to communicate the wishes of their country to the host country in hopes of avoiding unnecessary armed confrontations. Embassies have a small honorary guard contingent to protect the ambassador and the embassy.
Ambassadors are often political hacks, contributors to the current party in power or watchers to make sure the diplomatic staff do not escape…varies from country to country. Within the mix are statesmen with in depth knowledge of the host country many years of professional and academic development and diplomatic skills that begins with fluency in the language of the host country. It seems out man in Lybia was of the latter caliber….with grace under pressure…he was a brave guy.
Regardless of what you call it, our embassy was assaulted during some kind of civil unrest within the country. What we have done in past situations has varied so widely I can’t think of a consistent pattern. In this case illiterate peasants with instructions to avenge a dishonored Quaran or an unidentified group of terrorists. It doesn’t matter. The tradition of world wide diplomacy instructs us to shut up and take the hit. Discover who did it and let come patriotic CIA guy do a double tap in some alley in a few months. This worked with Bin Laden.
Since we cannot identify terror we cannot have a war against an abstraction. Using this event as proof something needs to be done to change our government is just premature.
And Fletcher, not to worry…the people of Libya know we can shoot. We brought flaming death from the sky to one of their leaders who blew up a bar full of U.S. servicemen in Germany…………every day the U.S. Marine Corp. sings their song and remembers …”the shores of Tripoli…” Libya knows who we are…so cool it!
Joe
Stephan Sonn says
The October surprise has arrived/ Libya Gate. Starring Dale Issa
Stephan Sonn says
I bore easily Fletcher
so as long as you keep the pace,
I am there for the tort.
So bring it on as they say.
Gene Wagner says
I have to agree with DLaMotte, Fletcher Hall is off base on this one. None of has enough knowledge about the situation to be as positive as to the cause and outcome as Mr. Hall seems to be.
GeneW
Joel Brandes says
We now have the CIA station chief in Libya revealing that he had reported there was no spontaneus demonstration at the consulate and this was a co=ordinted terrorist attack. Will the Kool Aide drinkers now claim it was a plot by the intelligence community and the State Department to embarass Obama? This is fast becoming Watergate on steroids. The exception is, instead of following the money, we now must follow the reports.
Jack Offett says
I wonder if those who triumphed over the State Department Training Facility are happy now.
joe diamond says
Jack,
I think they built it in Beltsville, Md….instead of here.
Joe
Steve Payne says
They already had a small one in the Beltsville Agricultural Research Center before this one was proposed. They might have expanded it.
joe diamond says
For those who came in late…I found one summary that seems to cover, for now the events in Libya on September at the American Embassy in Benghazi:
“The Benghazi flap is the sort of situation that intelligence officers dread: when politicians are demanding hard “yes” or “no” answers but evidence is fragmentary and conflicting. The political debate has focused on whether the attack was spontaneous or planned, but the official said there’s evidence of both, and that different attackers may have had different motives. There’s no dispute, however, that it was “an act of terror,” as Obama described it the next day.
And there are other conflicting summaries.
I am reminded of a time in another century when an American warship blew up in Havana harbor. Remember the Maine? The U.S. Navy needed a coaling port in the Pacific and Spain had the Philippine Islands………the harbor at Guantanamo was nice…….so we declared war on Spain. The fact that the ship was blown up by and internal explosion of ammunition came out later. Even though Teddy Roosevelt charged up the wrong hill his reputation was made and we acquired some naval bases. America was steered into a little war by a rush to judgment.
Same thing happened after 9/11 with Iraq. The the attackers were Saudies who had joined a group in Afganistan called al-Qaeda.
What we need is an informed electorate. This incident contains little information. It will be, even after all is known, a blip on the radar. America lost a dedicated diplomat. There are still many in the world who don’t like us. We could do with a little less shouted bull shit from both parties trying to influence election results.
Joe
Stephan Sonn says
Truth… What a maligned concept alternately
bastardized or deified by whoever holds the microphone.
This country is in the midst of a takeover attempt
by a combination of culled ignorance
and class warfare as a betting sport for the super rich.
Kochism is a social disease.
Stephan Sonn says
I am pretty well through with this particular commentary.
It doesn’t surprise me that Mr Diamond presented himself so well.
I saw so little indication of the skills of tort
that might be expected of someone like Mr Brandes.
Perhaps it is because there is no case.
Bill Parks says
Well, Mr. Lincoln certainly knew his party: nobody is more easily fooled than a Republican. Perhaps that’s why Mr. Hall is rushing to judgment on the event in Benghazi.
Reasonable people understand that our government agencies need accurate, reliable information for making sound decision, correcting security weakness and keeping the U.S. safe without committing to some foolish military adventure.
There is nothing like using premature information for making bad decision. This tendency may explain why Mr. Romney’s is perpetually shifting his positions on so many issues.
If President Obama were to follow Republican leadership model, using Bush – Cheney as an example of decision making and decisive military action, like they did in Iraq, the President may use the events in Benghazi as grounds for invading Canada.
gerry maynes says
Hi, Mr Lincoln was speaking of Senator Douglas in reply to one of the Senators Barbs toward him in the Lincoln Douglas Debates. Lincoln lost the Senatorial rasce but two years beat Douglass and Breckenridge the Vice President, and Judge Bell for the Presidency. Lincoln new Senator Douglass and the Democratic Party as well as the American People. Mr Obama, much like Mr Douglass did , is about to find out the wisdom of Mr Lincolns comment, on Election Day. I think his line of Baloney is in disfavor.
Bill Blake says
The Fog of War
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HODxnUrFX6k
joe diamond says
Joel,
From what I see, the cover up is probably at a lower level. The dialogue from the people on the ground to congress and any media who will listen seems to be along the lines of an I-told-you-so signal. There were messages about increasing security in Yeman and Lebanon…even the World Trade Center had suspicions of another attack. Egypt and Libya were equally unpredictable.
So ambassadors and military commanders sent messages up the chain for protection for their people. After the attacks succeeded the lack of response to the warnings looked pretty bad for senior people at State and the White House. This would not be the first time an administration has played CYA. The news cycle could have been shorter is someone had just admitted the situation was unexpectedly violent.
Then it got tossed into the presidential debate. Mitt hinted he could have done better. The other possibility is that some embassies, naval ships and military outposts are intentionally left in harms way to test the resolve of enemies. That explanation would not come out in a presidential debate.
And that 90% disapproval with congress can be tricky. When we have one or both houses controlled by Democrats measures that are anathema to Republicans become law. As the balance changes pay back occures. You see a situation where the Republican platform is to oppose any Democratic bill and unseat the president. Moderates on both sides that attempt to move legislation through compromise are attacked in the next election for making a pact with the devil. A more zealous true believer is sent to Washington to vote along party lines or suffer the fate of his predecessor. It is the resultant log jambs that the 90% is pissed about. The wagon has horse at both ends. No amount or whipping or coaxing will make it move.
You gotta wonder what the other 10% see that there is to approve.
Joe
joe diamond says
Joel,
From what I see, the cover up is probably at a lower level. The dialogue from the people on the ground to congress and any media who will listen seems to be along the lines of an I-told-you-so signal. There were messages about increasing security in Yeman and Lebanon…even the World Trade Center had suspicions of another attack. Egypt and Libya were equally unpredictable.
So ambassadors and military commanders sent messages up the chain for protection for their people. After the attacks succeeded the lack of response to the warnings looked pretty bad for senior people at State and the White House. This would not be the first time an administration has played CYA. The news cycle could have been shorter is someone had just admitted the situation was unexpectedly violent.
Then it got tossed into the presidential debate. Mitt hinted he could have done better. The other possibility is that some embassies, naval ships and military outposts are intentionally left in harms way to test the resolve of enemies. That explanation would not come out in a presidential debate.
And that 90% disaproval with congress can be tricky. When we have one or both houses controlled by Democrats measures that are anathema to Republicans become law. As the balance changes pay back ocures. You see a situation where the Republican platform is to oppose any Democratic bill and unseat the president. Moderates on both sides that attempt to move legislation through compromise are attacked in the next election for making a pact with the devil. A more zealous true believer is sent to Washington to vote along party lines or suffer the fate of his predecessor. It is the resultant log jambs that the 90% is pissed about. The wagon has horse at both ends. No amount or whipping or coaxing will make it move.
You gotta wonder what the other 10% see that there is to approve.
Joe…….moved this back here
joe diamond says
Hmmmmmmmmm!
My comment and a copy of my comment moved out of sequence.
Joe
Joel Brandes says
As more revelations come forward it is becoming clear that Obama is the culprit behind lies being told to the public.. Gen. Petraeus has stated, it was not the CIA that told operatives to stand down. Gen. Hamm, in spite of what the secretary of defense said, offered that no one asked him to respond to the attack in Benghazi. It is clear that the national security advisor was able to view the attack, in real time, in the White House situation room. Hundreds of emails were sent to the highest levels of government begging for help. NONE CAME.
Joel Brandes says
The constant stream of lies coming from this administration is mind boggeling. Now Obama is claiming he issued orders for a rescue attempt. Evidently everyone disobeyed his order. How long will Gen. Petraeus, Gen. Dempsey, Secretary Clinton and Secretary Panetta go on sacrificing themselves to re-elect Obama?
Joel Brandes says
In Denver, on October 26th Obama made the following statement, (not verbatem, but factually correct) One hour after the attack, in Benghazi, he issued a directive to the military, to secure our personnel. If indeed, he did issue such a directive, the military disobeyed it.
Tom Martin says
I found it kind of ironic that a member of the political party that produced such luminaries as Senator Joseph McCarthy and Senator Jesse Helms, members of Congress who hated American diplomats more than than just about anything or anyone else, would now be so crestfallen over the death of the American Ambassador to Libya, until I realized the concern was to score a few cheap political points rather than mourn a patriot’s death. While McCarthy was shamed out of his career, it is regretable that Helms was able to infect his party with the virus of anti-diplomacy, an attitude that was resisted by Bush I but wholly embraced by Bush II and his neo-con confederates, unfortunately salted throught the Executive Branch of the US Government during his first term, including the US Department of State, in a way that Helms could only have imagined his foils to be. Unfortunately, it has now become boilerplate for the Romney team and its’ Tea Party allies as foreign policy realists like Richard Lugar are driven from the GOP by such fringe religious mullahs as Richard Mourdock. When critics of Obama foreign policy raise their voices, probe a little deeper and try to determine who is cutting checks for their contrary voice; do they want your kids to fight and die for their honorarium, their fees from their clients or is there a much more practical reason? It is getting more difficult to discern and we are becoming accustomed to indifference.
More
Joel Brandes says
OH Lord, How could I have left out, that man of such sterling character, William Jefferson Clinton. While serving as president he was convicted of perjury. No big thing according to Democrats. By the way, he was also disbarred from the practice of law. Again not very important. Then there is that thing about being a sexual preditor. Wouldn’t every Democrat be happy to have him alone with their daughters.
Stephan Sonn says
Why do you persist in praising your own crooks?
Marge Fallaw says
Well stated, Tom.