Week In The News: Petraeus, Gaza, Obama Meets The Press

Michiganjf

Israel at war AGAIN with it’s neighbors?

Thank GOD Romney and most of the “Right” lost the election!!

Ed75

Just a week after President Obama was re-elected, and after his big supporter NYC got decimated, and the Israeli-Palestinian crisis has returned with a vengeance. Not wasting any time.

1Brett1

Sandy came before the election, not as a result of.

…if “God” were going to teach New Yorkers a lesson, he/she/it would have waited to see how New Yorkers voted before exacting any punishment. Ostensibly, you are also saying that “God’s” vengeance is even more widespread and that what is happening in Israel is a manifestation of that vengeance. “God” seems to be pissed at the world over Obama being re-elected….”God” appears to be quite arbitrarily vindictive.Ed, why do you worship such a vile creature?
- Acnestes
  
  Really, don’t waste any time attempting to reason with Ed. Better to think of him as an SNL character. Or a Faux News “personality”. Strictly for laughs.
  - 1Brett1
    
    Actually, I do think of him as a SNL character AND a Faux News character all rolled into one!
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Like their take of Fox and Friends.
    - Michiganjf
      
      Is there a difference?
    - 1Brett1
      
      Yes, in that SNL actors know they’re being satirical. The characters they portray are just as absurd as the Fox’s folks; so, in that sense I see your point.
- Ed75
  
  Sandy did come before the election, sort of a warning and a taste of what would happen if we voted in someone with President Obama’s principles, which I’ve listed many times. And look at the areas it wiped out. (And what part of the world is ‘sandy’?)
  
  But God … how one could speak of God for a very long time. One story will do:
  
  The traveler passed by the fig tree and said ‘Please tell me something of God’.
  And the fig tree burst into bloom.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    How do you know that Sandy wasn’t to warn the U.S. not to vote for Romney? Why is it that tornadoes frequently rip through the Bible Belt while much of the liberal Northeast escapes most natural disasters? Weather is just the workings of nature, not the divine. To view it as though it is is practically medieval.
    - Acnestes
      
      There’s the basic disconnect. If it happens to me, it’s just nature. If it happens to you it’s divine retribution.
    - Don_B1
      
      It is actually pagan, pre-Abrahamic, but the influences of paganism remain, some by deliberate absorption, some by mischievous use by some, and most by being zombie myths .
      
      It just shows that Ed75 is willing to use even paganism to spread his message.
  - 1Brett1
    
    If Sandy was just a warning and a taste, then you must see the end of the world being nigh! Do you wear rags and carry around doomsday signs in your town, Ed?
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Religious people of all types have been predicting the end of the world for centuries, and none of them have gotten it right yet.
  - Don_B1
    
    “Sandy” is the diminutive of Sandra which is also a shortening of Cassandra, the figure of Greek mythology, who was always right but never believed.
    
    Says something that Republicans (and Ed75) will always choose to interpret Sandy’s message incorrectly. Remember the adage, you can’t fool Mother Nature?
    
    Ed75 apparently thinks he can. Isn’t there a Biblical injunction against “righteousness”?
    - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
      
      Righteousness aside, I thought “Sandy” was a male-named hurricane this year.
      
      The naming is alternating genders and alternating years, right? And “Irene” was female last year, leading to an “I” that’s male this year, and therefore K, M, O, Q and S.
MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

Do you think arch-right wingnut Netenyahu was holding back on behalf of Obama? The ’800′ rockets fired at Israel in the past month that have helped provoke this escalation didn’t start the day after Obama’s re-election. There’s absolutely no causal link.

Sadly, the Palestinians and Israeli’s will continue to slaughter each other until level-headed leadership prevails, promoted to power by public opinion on both sides of the border.
anamaria23

I am unfamiliar with your God. The God I know would be right there in the midst of those so stricken, not using them to stick it to President Obama.
- StilllHere
  
  Where did he mention G-d?
  - anamaria23
    
    I think he forgot this time.
Shag_Wevera

Ed don’t do dialogue. He is like five oclock charlie from MASH. Flies overhead in the sputtering WWII vintage plane, tosses a grenade over the side that lands in a field, then sputters off into the sunset.
Denis

I know it does no good to respond to your ratings, but it needs to be pointed out that Sandy happened before the election and most prominent Republicans believe Sandy stopped Romney’s momentum and allowed the president to be re-elected. So my question to you is: Was Sandy God’s way of assuring the President would be re-elected?
- Don_B1
  
  As a deserved putdown of Ed75′s ignorance, your comment is delightful.
  
  But just to keep the record straight, Romney never had “momentum,” just a post first debate “bump,” which can be seen ending before or by the days immediately following the second Presidential debate in most of the poll aggregators (538, Sam Wang, Pollster, etc.).
  
  I do not think that the full story should not be given as Republicans are looking for an easy explanation for their election loss, and that should not be one.
  
  In one sense, maybe Democrats should not help Republicans figure out their problem, because they seem to want to pick a reason that will allow a repetition of the loss at least once more, and that might well be necessary for the future of this country to be good for all its citizens, not just the really wealthy.
  
  On the other hand, the country does actually need two parties but with both promoting policies based on empirical facts.
J__o__h__n

Any comment on the death of Savita Halappanavar that could have been prevented if the Catholics in Ireland didn’t impose their beliefs on a woman’s medical decisions?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/irish-abortion-denial-death-preventable-doctors/story?id=17720871
Don_B1

Did you ever think (well, that might be a difficult thing to answer) while you’re at it, that God might have wanted to punish the whole country for ignoring CO2 emissions and the resulting climate change? If God is using nature to do that He hit the most people with a single (though big) storm that created devastation that has not yet been totalled.

What are you going to read into another “Sandy” in a few years? Then when they occur every other year? Then when you get at least one every year?

Just remember it will be REPUBLICANS, acting for the fossil fuel industry that brought them, not necessarily GOD.

As recently as 2005 (another of the warmest years in directly measured history) when Hurricane Tammy followed a similar path, ran into a “blocking high” and turned west toward land. The big differences: Tammy had lost more strength than Sandy (cooler Gulf Stream than in 2012) and its path went east of New York, up through western Connecticut and Massachusetts. But the rainfall was over 10″ in much of its path until it passed over Massachusetts.

Potter

The Netanyahu government in Israel playing an internal game for the coming elections and their party’s agenda to “have the whole pizza as they eat it” are now against the limit that many of us have been warning about regarding Israel’s relationships with their neighbors, the international community and even Americans, Jews too, who are tired of this. There is just so far military action can keep a “status quo” like that before it just does not work anymore. For the Palestinians and many many who have watched this for years now– the greater injustice is perpetrated by the Israeli’s. The sympathy is not for those who support Israel’s right wing expansionist agenda (as they point to Iran and keep saying they want peace). Hamas has moderates, has moderated positions. But as they gain sympathy, they are going to get more support for their own extremist positions.

The extremists in Israel, and Israel’s hubris because of it’s heavy military advantage have just loved any chance to show their power off. That day when they can without a very severe price may be coming to an end.

I am looking at Obama– this is his moment to allow some daylight.

Michael Oren, Israel’s ambassador, gets our mute button.

I may sound anti-Israel– but believe me I am not. Quite the opposite. This is a time those who love Israel should be worried.

ttajtt

how shy is this war, roomer of wars in a sense, started in the iran hostage of ’79′, its not just a blind eye “scientific movie art” on economic filmed bullet (EFB) vs a faster berserk world war of destruction, spoils. will Israel become a NATO member. they are to get peace for a time, before/after the population generation. what a trap we weaved?

1Brett1

Senator McCain positioned himself in front of any camera/microphone he could yesterday screaming that he wants information NOW about the Benghazi attack. Of course, he appeared at these media outlets while he intentionally didn’t attend a congressional committee briefing (a committee he chairs, by the way) that distributed information about the Benghazi attack. That’s how you know someone is either grandstanding or being disingenuous: you give him what he is whining about and he continues to whine.

jimino

McCain’s entire political career began with failure, assuming his Viet Nam mission was not to have the plane he was piloting shot down and himself captured. He of all people should appreciate that in far-away, dangerous, chaotic places, bad things happen despite the best equipment, training and planning.
- 1Brett1
  
  Excellent point. Perhaps he thinks he should be stripped of all his own medals, and his pension?
  - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
    
    Rhetorically speaking, that’s a bit much. However I agree with your and Jimino’s idea that McCain should know better while on “this side of the table”.
    
    That understanding, it’s supposed to be one of the benefits of having ex-combat veterans in elected or appointed “civilian” office, isn’t it?
    - 1Brett1
      
      I was exaggerating to make a point. McCain’s rhetoric is so over the top saying others are unfit for certain positions, yet does he apply the same harsh criticisms toward himself and the mistakes he made while serving? No, he doesn’t. McCain is just a bitter dinosaur anymore; he should retire. And, his call for a “Watergate-style” investigation on top of the one being conducted, especially when there is too much waste and duplication? At best he’s using his position as a resident master grandstander.
    - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
      
      Brett, I thought that’s what you meant. Darn internet and how it can’t communicate vocal tones, or sarcasm!
Jasoturner

McCain is now a bitter old man who still rankles at the notion that “that one”, Obama, beat him in a presidential race. I’d feel sorry for him if he weren’t so hazardous for the country. His decision to embrace anger and bitterness rather than accept the will of the people is rather emblematic of the GOP at large.

BTW, Pretty hilarious commentary on McCain and Graham by Alex Pareene over at Salon. Worth a read.
MrNutso

It only gets better.

http://nymag.com/daily/intel/2012/11/john-mccain-snaps-at-cnn-reporter.html
- 1Brett1
  
  I know, I saw that yesterday…McCain must be off his meds or something.
  - Don_B1
    
    Some of McCain’s like-minded Senators are leaving the Senate, Sen. Lieberman and Sen. Kyl, so the group that has controlled Republican foreign policy is reduced in size and therefore influence.
    
    McCain is slated to be rotated out of his minority-side leadership of the Foreign Affairs Committee and is “fighting for influence,” but seemingly in ways counterproductive to retaining it, with the possible exception that Republican politics require weird actions.
    - 1Brett1
      
      Yeah, he’s worried about his loss of power. I guess he’s overcompensating…
hennorama

The respect Sen. McCain has enjoyed for his POW days and his prior Congressional service to the nation is waning. It’s a sad episode in his distinguished career. This appears to be a personal feud between Sen. McCain and Pres. Obama, and it is unfortunate and embarrassing for Sen. McCain to play this out in public.
Not to mention the obvious hypocrisy involved when one compares the circumstances of Amb. Susan Rice’s comments with former National Security Advisor Condoleeza Rice’s “mushroom cloud” WMD comments.

NewtonWhale

Mitt Romney: The Gift That Keeps on Giving.

ROMNEY ATTRIBUTES LOSS TO ‘GIFTS’ OBAMA GAVE MINORITIES

“The Obama campaign was following the old playbook of giving a lot of stuff to groups that they hoped they could get to vote for them and be motivated to go out to the polls, specifically the African American community, the Hispanic community and young people,” Romney told hundreds of donors during a telephone town hall Wednesday. “In each case they were very generous in what they gave to those groups.”

“With regards to African American voters, ‘Obamacare’ was a huge plus — and was highly motivational to African American voters. You can imagine for somebody making $25—, or $30—, or $35,000 a year, being told you’re now going to get free healthcare — particularly if you don’t have it, getting free healthcare worth, what, $10,000 a family, in perpetuity, I mean this is huge. Likewise with Hispanic voters, free healthcare was a big plus.”

“The president’s campaign,” he said, “focused on giving targeted groups a big gift — so he made a big effort on small things. Those small things, by the way, add up to trillions of dollars.”

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-romney-donors-20121115,0,1719033.story

I’ll let Bobby Jindal take it from here:

“This is completely unhelpful,” Jindal said. “This is not where the Republican Party needs to go.

”He went on to offer some basic advice: “If you want voters to like you, the first thing you’ve got to do is to like them first. And it’s certainly not helpful to tell voters that you think their votes were bought. That’s certainly not a way to show them you respect them, you like them.”

“We need to stop talking down to voters,” Jindal said. “As a Republican party, we need to fight for 100 percent of the electorate. Not 53 percent, not 52 percent, but 100 percent. We’ve got to stop trying to divide people into different groups by race, by gender, by class. Instead, we’ve got to show them that our conservative principles will help them pursue the American dream.”

Simply put: “We don’t win elections by insulting voters.

”http://www.mediaite.com/tv/bobby-jindal-takes-on-gop-on-cnn-we-dont-win-elections-by-insulting-voters/

Romney will be remembered, if at all, as a loathsome candidate: self absorbed, entitled, out of touch, and still the same bully who rounded up a posse of prep school prigs to attack a gay classmate.

1Brett1

…As if those working without insurance won’t have to pay for it with “ObamaCare”

I imagine people struggling economically probably aren’t too happy that they’ll have to go out and buy insurance or pay a fine.
- Steve__T
  
  I can imagine the free clinics will be over run, not that they aren’t already.
  - 1Brett1
    
    Free clinics won’t qualify as having health insurance; one will have to BUY insurance or pay a fine. Which is my point regarding Romney talking about “free stuff.”
    - Steve__T
      
      I’m in agreement, I was thinking of those who will be fined and cant pay but still need medical help. Where else can they turn? As Jason said game over.
    - Don_B1
      
      Those who do not have the income to pay for a healthcare policy will qualify for public assistance in paying for it.
- Jasoturner
  
  Talk to someone struggling economically who has a family member with serious health problems and no insurance. It’s game over.
  - 1Brett1
    
    And Romney flippantly calls the ACA free stuff.
  - DrewInGeorgia
    
    Universal Healthcare is the only solution and nobody is willing to pay for it. People constantly say that we can’t afford to have healthcare for all. I don’t understand how we fail to realize at this point that we can’t afford not to.
    - Thinkin5
      
      Businesses don’t want to pay for their employees health insurance anymore, wages for the majority are too low and, for some, non-existant, so they can’t afford it. We all want to live….so I think that we all know what that means. The right’s ‘right to lifers’ don’t seem to mind if you die due to lack of health care. I find that perplexing, when many times good health care can help you survive.
    - Jasoturner
      
      Indeed. And we’re too self-satisfied to look at other countries with equal or better health care outcomes that deliver care at a fraction of the cost we pay, and copy their model. Nah, we’ve got the “best healthcare system in the world”.
      
      Crazy what we talk ourselves into.
    - DrewInGeorgia
      
      And even crazier what we talk ourselves out of (doing).
- http://profile.yahoo.com/ZKG7NEG53UKVK7OTIT7Y4VMBOM Jay D
  
  who are these people you speak of, do you know some, everyone keeps talking about the most smallest part of the population that have enough money to pay for health insurance but don’t buy it because they are healthy and yet they are struggling financially.
  
  The law will cover or assist in the purchase of insurance if you are a person who can’t afford it.
  STOP THINKING THAT PEOPLE WHO CAN”T AFFORD IT WILL BE FORCED TO PAY, because they won’t the price will be offset or covered for them!
  
  1. So If you have insurance already, your good 83.7% of America.
  
  2. If you can’t get insurance because insurance company’s don’t want you, you will get it now 3.5% of America.
  
  3. If you can’t pay for it, it will be provided for you 12%.
  
  4. If you can buy it, they are going to lower the cost and make it easier to buy .7%.
  
  5. If you can buy it and chose to pay the fine instead .1%.
  
  So your whole argument is for about 300 thousand people out of the 314 million that live in the US? I think for the good of us all this is better than what we have now.
  
  Where 11 Million or just straight up denied it!
  http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/27/politics/btn-health-care/index.html
  - 1Brett1
    
    You’ve completely misinterpreted my reply to someone else. I was saying that Romney was wrong in his characterization that “Obamacare” is free. Those who can pay for insurance will or pay a fine; those who can’t (just like with Medicaid now), will have assistance.
    
    I didn’t say that those who can’t afford it will be forced to buy it, but everyone will have to either have insurance or pay a fine, or have all of the costs waived due to their poverty.
    
    I do hear grumbling from some individuals who don’t want to buy it or pay a fine, and they are complaining, but that wasn’t my larger point (although they don’t see anything as “free”).
    
    Anyway you look at, it ain’t free, though, just like no health care, either paid for or not, is free, my point being Romney was disingenuous (when he called these “gifts” or the refrain of “free stuff, which is absurd) because he knows how it all works.
JGC

Gov. Jindal definitely showed some passion and class in his response to the Romney Gift.

Gov. Romney is as impoverished in his compassion as he is enriched in his overseas bank accounts.
- Don_B1
  
  But note that Gov. Jindal only talked about the spoken message, but not the policies, which is where the rubber meets the road.
Jasoturner

Romney is now irrelevant, and as Jindal’s comments show, republicans who aren’t totally divorced from reality recognize that his lack of empathy for working Americans was a huge, huge problem. The question for me is, will the republican party try to reinvent itself back into relevance? Or will is simply try to reinvent it’s marketing approach? I rather expect the latter, given the baseless fervor with which republican embrace certain positions on taxes and social issues.
- NewtonWhale
  
  On Morning Joe today, David Gregory urged Republicans to stick to their right wing agenda:
  
  “I think this is about tone. You know the temptation is to say “Oh, I see what Republicans have to do, they have to become more moderate, they have to move toward the Democrats. That is not the answer, This is about rebranding conservatism and a conservative approach to governing but to being more tolerant, to having a different tone about talking to immigrants and to other people in the country who are not for them.”
  
  That’s right Fluffy. Actual policies are for losers.Just get Frank Luntz to work on some feel good slogans that hide your extreme agenda then it’s full speed ahead on crazy.
  - Jasoturner
    
    Well, maybe Romney is relevant after all. He was dumb enough to open the kimono and show the rubes how the republican party really feels about them. It’s going to be that much harder to con ‘em with jsut branding and slogans going forward.
  - Don_B1
    
    David Gregory was friends with Paul Ryan at their gym some 10 or more years ago.
    
    This statement from him demonstrates that the MSM, at least the “big” news program presenters, make too much money and have lost any understanding of working class life. If they actually have “liberal values,” most workers would not recognize them.
    
    [That might be worth an On Point program!]
Bill_GKD

One of my friends said on Facebook: “I’m a black woman. I don’t remember getting any gifts from Obama.”
1Brett1

Romney is being especially disingenuous; he knows all about the health care law and how it works. He is just having a little tantrum of sour grapes.
- http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
  
  But that’s the amazing thing: Romney is the Republican all the Republicans loathed, up until the moment he clinched the nomination.
  
  The cottage industry of the right’s (abetted heavily by the mainstream media) which exists to “wash the loserness off losing Republicans” doesn’t feel the need to do anything on Romney’s behalf.
  
  Mitt’s not gonna be the future of the party or an emeritus statesman, so nobody on that side feels the need to polish his shoes. (Contrast to Palin, McCain, Dole, Kemp, Bush the elder, and Dan Quayle.) Anything that reflects well on Mitt is simply a coincidence, aligned to larger GOP aims.
mezure

I’m afraid I posted my brief retort about Governor Romney’s stupid statements blaming the gift receivers before I read your post. But in response to your quotes by Governor Jindal–“We don’t win elections by insulting voters,” and “As a Republican party, we need to fight for 100 percent of the electorate, not 53 percent, not 52 percent, but 100 percent.”– may I suggest you examine his remarks a little closer. This can be easily done by looking at the census data. Jindal literally overlooked tens of thousands of people in his state and in the United States overall who do not vote. I just took the current 2012 election totals for President and subtracted them from the eligible voting population and found that 89 million citizens of voting ages did not vote. As you can see “insulting voters” is a wonderful way of overlooking one third of eligible voters, who are disenfranchised for various reasons. It may be conjecture on my part but I think with a little bit of research, anyone can easily discover that a large percentage of these nonvoters are receivers of the pittance that is so sadly referred to as gifts.
hennorama

Three possible explanations for Mr. Romney’s “gifts” remarks come to mind:
1. This is what he truly believes. A strong case can be made for this when combined with his quite passionate “47%” remarks.
2. This may simply be what he tells “the money guys,” whether they are his own fund-raising team, or potential donors.
3. Since his political career is now over, he may be “drawing fire” in order to allow other Republicans to put a better political face forward by criticizing Mr. Romney. In other words, he may be “taking one for the team.”
Regardless, Republicans who pick up this nonsensical line of “reasoning” do so at their peril, since it’s clearly proven to be a losing proposition.

MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

I gotta give Romney credit – his reality distortion field was so powerful that he hypnotized himself!

StilllHere

It’s nothing compared to Obama’s vortex of dependence.
- Shag_Wevera
  
  Speaking of way off topic…
  - 1Brett1
    
    Hey, it’s just a surprise he is using words like “vortex” at all!
  - Steve__T
    
    Talk about stuck in a vortex.
Jasoturner

Way off topic, but speaking of RDFs, does it feel to anybody else that Apple is just another consumer goods manufacturer now that Steve Jobs is gone? Somehow their products seem kind of dull and evolutionary at this point. Not special. I did not feel that way a couple of years ago.
- DrewInGeorgia
  
  You’re not the only one that feels that way, even Wall Street is starting to come around. To the Apple Acolytes this will be blasphemous but:
  
  Releasing ten different versions of the same thing, changing the color, slightly decreasing the size, and putting each in a shiny new box isn’t innovation. It’s Marketing.
  - Mike_Card
    
    The lingering legacy of John Scully.

Shag_Wevera

Aaaaaaahhhhh… Don’t mind me, I’m just enjoying the cannibalization of former candidate Romney by his republican brethren. I predicted it, it is happening, and Ima luvin’ it!!!

Denis

In my opinion, Senator McCain and Senator Graham’s behavior is disrespectful to those who lost their lives in the attack in Benghazi. If they were true patriots and honest seekers of the truth they would not be standing in front of TV cameras shouting about their assumptions about what happened in Benghazi. They would be quietly working with the committees and investigators trying to find answers and then respectfully and efficiently working to help resolve the issues the investigations determine need to be fixed. Again, in my opinion, the above mentioned Senators behavior is disrespectful to the lives of the brave souls that lost their lives in Benghazi.

StilllHere

They wouldn’t have to base their comments on assumptions if Obama would stop the distortions and lies which have truly sullied the honor of those who paid the ultimate price. Obama is playing politics with this less than optimal disaster under his watch.
- Jasoturner
  
  Maybe if McCain found the time to attend the briefing held by the Homeland Security Committee (a committee on which he serves!) he wouldn’t have to assume anything.
- Denis
  
  You are really despicable… It is not President Obama’s team skipping the hearings trying to discuss and resolve this issue. Senator McCain, the bitter old Senator that lost the Presidential bid four years ago and still cannot accept that is the one running to every TV camera he can find and shouting unsubstantiated lies to a media that has always loved him and also cannot accept the fact he lost four years ago. If you and those you seem to adore had any patriotism in your body you would ask for calm, look at the facts as they are presented by the various investigative bodies involved and then act in a dignified response. You would not attempt to stir the waters with unfounded Fox/McCain/Graham statements.
  - StilllHere
    
    You don’t know what a patriot is and your despicable attempts to discredit an American hero dishonor all of those who died for freedom. You don’t care about those who died and you don’t care about the truth. Truly disgusting.
    - Shag_Wevera
      
      Rubbish. Man up and answer the charges levied against you.
    - 1Brett1
      
      “Mine eyes have seen the glory of the coming of….” Come on, sing it with me, SH…
    - jefe68
      
      You are the type of person Samuel Johnson had in mind when he said “patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel”.
      
      What’s truly disgusting is how you hide behind the flag and the idea of patriotism when all you really are is a coward and a bully. There are other words that come to mind, but your not worth the time to type them.
- Shag_Wevera
  
  What’s the real goal here? Is it impeachment, or just a stall tactic intended to consume the first two most productive years of this presidential term? Try and get to the final two years when traditionally nothing gets done.
  
  You folks don’t give a rip about the poor, you don’t give a rip about the uninsured, you don’t want a dime of your taxes to go toward the social safety net, you don’t talk about the 4-5 THOUSAND Americans or the 150,000 Iraqis who have died in these foolish wars, but BY GOD, THESE FOUR MARTYRS MUST BE AVENGED AT ANY COST!!!
  
  Conservatives really have NO credibility when it comes to compassion and concern regarding others.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    I’m inclined to think that some are trying to drum up grounds for impeachment, no matter how weak the case. Can’t beat a Democrat at the ballot box, then try to get him out another way. Of course, any actions of a Republican president never call for such an action.
    - 1Brett1
      
      Beat him in an election? Didn’t work. Secede from the Union? Isn’t working. Impeach him (as has been suggested in some robo-calls in Red states)? I’m sure some’ll try.
      
      ….And all of this started the day after the election! Just coincidental timing from concerned citizens? I don’t think so…
    - Don_B1
      
      One of the “birther groups” has already started with a robo-call campaign to pressure the House Tea/Republicans to begin the Impeachment process.
      
      You are correct, though, that those “crazy-radical” Republicans do not consider ANY Democrat a “legitimate” president, particularly a Black Democrat.
  - StilllHere
    
    The truth. Liberals have no concept of the truth, or work, or independence. Liberal slackers want a social hammock, not a net. They want multi-generational dependence on the government and beholden voters. Conservatives give more to charity and ask nothing in return. Liberal compassion does not exist.
    - Shag_Wevera
      
      So lame. Do you regret this post?
    - StilllHere
      
      Regret no, but I have nothing but sympathy for your ignorance and compassion for those who must deal with you.
    - Shag_Wevera
      
      Let this series of responses stand as a monument to the cowardice of the right.
    - 1Brett1
      
      You always seem to get to the point in your replies of, “I know you are but what am I.” …You have an amazing perspective on the definition of wit…
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Hahahaha. Is that why the wealthiest and most educated states go consistently blue, while the poorest and most educated go red? Is that why most of states that give the most to the federal government are blue and the big takers are mostly red. I’d take liberal Massachusetts over the deep south hell holes of Alabamy or Miss’ssippi any day. What’s conservative compassion? They’ll sprinkle some magic liberty dust on you after you lose your job and tell you to suck it up?
    - northeaster17
      
      Liberals have no concept of work truth or independence? What?! Walk a mile in my shoes dude. Advertisd ignornce or arrogance such as yours is the hallmarkof the dying repulican party. Good ridance
    - Thinkin5
      
      I saw Grover Norquist saying on TV that the “middle class is where the money is”. He was making the argument that if you raise taxes on the rich, it will be the middle class next. It all boils down to the people who have profited obscenely these last decades, just want more and more and are bitching the most.
    - anamaria23
      
      You need to get out more, mingle with the great “unwashed” and bring Mr. Romney with you. Their earnest striving, too many left behind in this world in transition, are pretty amazing. Education, health care, support is what will lift them up as it has so many generations before, not the “tough love” the Repubs embrace. We have a President with enough moral fiber to get behind them.
  - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
    
    “What’s the goal there?” you ask?
    
    I’m guessing: A little of Column A, a little of Column B.
  - MrNutso
    
    I’m not really sure there is a goal. Just hypocritical behavior. Stupid stuff by Republicans in the past doesn’t matter only supposed stupid stuff by Democrats does.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Can you imagine if a Democrat had covertly supplied arms to Iran and used the proceeds to fund 3rd World death squads? They’d still be screaming about it daily 25 years later.
    - MrNutso
      
      Marines killed in Beirut, Iran – Contra, Iraq war …
- 1Brett1
  
  You’re not privy to any “lies or distortions,” so you’re just playing that stupid partisan, anti-Obama game you always play.
- anamaria23
  
  It is interesting that you know the truth of what happened, thus know that the President is lying.
  Tell us, with your sources. And be sure to let Congress know as well so that we may avoid the Watergate style hearings.
  What happened was terrible tragedy. Let us honor the victims by proceeding with an open mind to learn the truth.
- Thinkin5
  
  Wasn’t it Mitt who used one of the Bengazi security guards death in his campaign? The soldier’s mother asked him to please stop and to leave him out of it.
  - Davesix6
    
    “Mitt” had actually met Gen Doherty one of the former “Navy Seals” killed in Benghazi.
    
    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/election-2012/wp/2012/10/09/romney-met-one-of-the-former-navy-seals-killed-in-benghazi/
WorriedfortheCountry

All they are asking for is combining 4 separate congressional committees into one. This makes sense because the action spans intelligence, military and state. Since so many different congressional committees have oversight it makes complete sense to create a special investigative committee — otherwise the investigations go in circles.

kaysweeney

why no coverage of Bill McKibben’s 350 “do the math” tour which was held in Boston last night? Didn’t see anything in the Globe either? Are important heads in the sand?

Davesix6

Most people are now rejecting McKibben’s math kaysweeney.
Except of course those like Albert Gore Junior who stands to make hundreds of millions of dollars off “man made global warming”.

The MET in Great Britian has now released data that show the climate has not warmed in the past 16 years.

1Brett1

McCain said Susan Rice, “is not qualified to be Secretary of State.” He said also because, “she is not very bright.” This is coming from a man who chose Sarah Palin as his running mate. In the words of the always fair and balanced Gregg Smith: “alrighty then!”

OnPointComments

There were a number of commenters on here who said on the Friday after the attack that what happened in Benghazi couldn’t have been a spontaneous protest about a YouTube video; it defied logic to believe that participants in an unplanned protest carried assault weapons and missiles. Yet on the Sunday after the attack, UN Ambassador Susan Rice went on five news shows and said that was what happened. If an intelligence agency gave her that information and she believed it, then I agree that she must not be very bright.
Don_B1

From a man, McCain, who was “for selling weapons to Qaddafi” before he was for putting forces in Libya to take him down, we get an incoherent attack on one of the most qualified UN Ambassadors since Clinton appointed Richard Holbrooke (and previously Bill Richardson, with a nod to Bush’s John Danforth).

mezure

The statements made by Governor Romney about gifts given to Blacks, Latinos and single women, begs the question, what percentage of these so-called gift receivers vote? When the Governor’s statement was publicized, no one in the media sought to blunt its stupidity by just merely stating the facts. It may be too early to get the census data for particulars about the voting populace in the 2012 election, but the data from the past ten plus years of Presidential and Congressional elections is readily available. Why do we keep arguing about statements that can be so easily put to rest?

WorriedfortheCountry

Romney was simply stating the obvious. That is why it isn’t a big deal.

Almost every action by Obama after the midterms was about electoral advantage.
- MadMarkTheCodeWarrior
  
  You must be taking the same drugs as Romney… He was promising 5 trillion in tax cuts, primarily to the wealthy, while increasing defense spending and balancing the budget. You’re just proving that Republicans can’t do math… and that makes them to better able to run business?!!! Snap out of it!
  
  Never have so many asked so few to do so little. Your math is as bad as Romney’s.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Wow. You really bought into the Axelrod lies. Romney proposed a 20% tax rate cut for everyone offset by closing loopholes.
    He also stated the wealthy would pay the same share of income tax. Therefore, his proposal BY DEFINITION wasn’t a tax cut for the wealthy. It was tax reform.
    
    You should snap out of it. The election is over.
    - MadMarkTheCodeWarrior
      
      The devil is in the details… learn to read. “5 trillion in tax cuts, primarily to the wealthy,” When you look at the numbers, Romney’s unwillingness to provide details and Republican tax policy, there is no doubt, most of the tax cuts would go to the wealthy.
- Thinkin5
  
  Meanwhile, Mitt’s promised gift to Adelson, Trump, Koch Brothers, etc. etc. of huge tax cuts didn’t materialize. Sorry boys, no gifts in return for your millions.

sickofthechit

A little tax question for y”all from Ol’Kentucky.
Wouldn’t it be “fairer” and more effective if instead of rolling back the Temporary Bush Tax Cuts, instead we increase everyone’s taxes by the same percentage? So that if the lowest tax rate (10%) is increased by 5% which is actually a 50% increase then shouldn’t those paying 34% need to pay 50% of 34% additional for a total of 51% to be “fair”?
Charles A. Bowsher

BHA_in_Vermont

Sound fair to me.

sickofthechit

Bp has not paid enough, it is still in existence. At the very least their profits should all be turned over until the Gulf is proven to be clear from the effects of their spill say ….10, 20 or 30 years hence. charles a. bowsher

MrNutso

There are still charges pending on other issues.

TomK_in_Boston

It’s nice to see Lord R confirming what a disgusting human being he is, following his 47% comments with the “gifts” comments, even sarcastically suggesting that the dems run on free dental care in 2016. Even the rest of the GoP are starting to puke over his rants. This pampered, privileged character, who said he had inherited nothing from his governor-CEO father and never did a day of real work in his life, is like a cartoon plutocrat. However, somehow I don’t see him getting redemption like Ebenezer Scrooge. What a bullet we dodged! The hostile takeover of the USA by Bane would have been ultimate defeat in the class war. Thank you God!

Thinkin5

Mitt and cohorts are right out the Dickens story. You’d think that they were suffering economically instead of possessing record wealth.
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  Why are the privileged so angry?

Thinkin5

Lindsey Graham and John McCain are livid because they missed an opportunity to exploit the attack on Bengazi before the election. The White House officially called the attack a terrorist attack soon after the initial statement. There is no disagreement on that now. What matters now is how to prevent another like that. Repubs. have to own up to their responsibility in this poor security. THEY voted AGAINST increasing the budget for security!!

WorriedfortheCountry

Your assertion has already been debunked by the state department.
- Thinkin5
  
  What’s been debunked?
  - Davesix6
    
    Everything you said!
    - Thinkin5
      
      ….said the FOX bubble watcher.
    - Davesix6
      
      Lindsey Graham and John McCain are livid because it’s clear now that four Americans died needlessly in Benghazi Libya on September 11 2012.The Obama Administration was asked repeatedly for more security and those requests were repeatedly denied.
      Your blind attempt at defending Obama no matter the cost, now includes four lives lost due to the incompetence of this administration.
- Bill_GKD
  
  Which part? The President did refer to acts of terror when talking about the attack the next day, and the GOP has passed budgets cutting funding for State Department security, so consider your assertion debunked.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    The state department was asked in a congressional hearing IF their security decisions in Benghazi was related to budgetary concerns. They flat out responded: NO
    - Bill_GKD
      
      So are you conceding that the GOP has cut the security budget for State Department activities? This was a temporary facility that was attacked, so that probably partly accounted for it’s security situation.
      
      Do you have a link for your claim about the State Department response. I’ve seen too many people misrepresent statements here to take anyone’s word for it.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      It was an open hearing. They played it on the 6pm Brett Baier news show at the time and then discussed it on the panel. I suspect you can find the video.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      What was the time frame? I searched a bit, but wasn’t sure which hearing it was or who might have said it. Details?
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Oct. 10th. Charlene Lamb was the SD spokesperson.
    
    ”
    But when questioned, Lamb denied that budgetary concerns had
    influenced her decision. committee “It has been suggested that budget
    cuts are responsible for a lack of security in Benghazi, and I’d like to
    ask Miss Lamb,” said Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R., Calif.). “You
    made this decision personally. Was there any budget consideration and
    lack of budget which lead you not to increase the number of people in
    the security force there?”
    
    “No, sir,” said Lamb.
    ”
    http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/329977/top-revelations-libya-hearing-katrina-trinko
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Thanks. I found the hearing and figured that that was the one. I was looking for a transcript to see what might have been said next.
      
      Ms. Lamb’s documents are here:
      
      http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/2012-10-09-Lamb-Testimony-FINAL1.pdf
      
      She describes the actions that had been taken to upgrade the facility. It still makes me wonder why Ambassador Stevens chose to remain there if he had any sort of grave concerns about the situation.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      Excellent question. There are many unanswered questions.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Indeed there are, but I can certainly do without the political grandstanding and whacko conspiracy theories. I’d rather let the process play out and see where things go. I think that too many people are ranting and raving to score political points.

Roy-in-Boise

The only realistic long term solution to this conflict is the two state solution. Anything short of this will ensure more conflict for years to come.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=502464197 Pete Darnell

It’s a chess game. Repubs want to disqualify Rice to force a Kerry pick as Sec State to give them a chance at Kerry’s Mass Senate seat.

StilllHere

Wouldn’t work if you got some more liberal Indians that could run.

skeptic150

McCain is insane (as are most of the Repubs in Washington, imo). Perhaps a Watergate investigation of his (their) mental status?
I went back and looked at the timelines and the transcripts. The timeline shows nothing was done inappropriately from a military perspective, imo. With respect to the commentary, the media kept pushing for more commentary and wouldn’t accept “we are investigating” as the only answer. The only “mistake” that was made, imo, was saying anything more than “we are investigating the matter.”�
Personally, I am more and more disgusted by the behavior and commentary of the Republican Party in general (for the record, I am an independent).

MrNutso

No Tom we do not need Watergate type hearings for anything except another Watergate. We continue to elevate issues that should be investigated on a Congressional level to the same importance as that of the systematic abuse of the office of the President to spy on a political party for political and ultimately personal gain.

Bill_GKD

According to Fox News this is at least Obama’s 4th or 5th Watergate, shattering the old record of 1 Watergate (paraphrased from the Daily Show).
- Mike_Card
  
  Fox will do just about anything to avoid giving Rove any more air time.
- MrNutso
  
  Nice. I’ll have to look that one up.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    It was a while back. Maybe September. Maybe even before that.

http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

“Did the President realize how it would play for him politically to defend Ambassador Rice as fully as he did?” asks Talev.

Yes. Republicans are pushing as much crap as they can. Being nice to Republicans never gets a Democrat anything. Obama knows this; does Talev?

BHA_in_Vermont

McCain is being an idiot.

There is a BIG difference between Watergate/Iran Contra and Benghazi. The first are preplanned illegal activities by the U.S. Government. This witch hunt is to determine if the people at the top are hiding details of an attack by foreign nationals.

Thinkin5

McCain hasn’t been right on any defense issue in years. He certainly used poor judgement in his selecting Palin and he still hasn’t admitted that he made a poor choice. He really should retire.

Davesix6

President Obama says Susan Rice had nothing to do with Benghazi, yet is was Susan Rice who took the administrations assertion that it the assualt was the result of mob violence.

From that moment on Susan Rice was very involved in Benghazi.

MrNutso

Except Jack, that Ambassador Rice couched her comments by saying things could change and the FBI was conducting an investigation. McCain et. al. are making it seem that what Rice say was fact, and that she came up with it.

Yar

Susan Rice for Secretary of State would be a joint decision between the President and her. She has to decide to brave the gauntlet along with the President’s recommendation. This causes good people not to serve. The President is right in defending her against a couple of bitter old white men.

Davesix6

Your racists, sexists remarks are on record Yar.
- http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
  
  “Help, help, I’m being repressed!”
- Yar
  
  I thought I was using ageism.
  - Davesix6
    
    That too!
    Congratulations accoding to left wing standards carried to their logical conclusion (I know left wing+logical= oxymoron), you are officially a racist, sexist bigot!
  - 1Brett1
    
    And here I thought you were unfairly criticizing all bitter people! Either way, your discriminatory remarks about old and bitter people are on record! And, hey, why are you exploiting roosters in your profile pic?
    - Yar
      
      I think I will save the rooster for Thanksgiving.
      His days are numbered.

DrewInGeorgia

Egypt’s removal of their Ambassador to Israel does not bode well. A caller asked what would have happened if Hamas had assassinated Israel’s Top Defense Bobble-Head doll, I think we all know the answer. I am deeply concerned about the Powder Keg at this point. Yes they have been at it for a loooooong time but the potential to drag the entire planet down in a heartbeat has never been greater.

skeptic150

Ah, President Bush spewed out nonsense about WMD as well. Granted, he may have received only the filtered “Intell” Rumsfeld/Cheney to achieve their objective of invading Iraq, but Bush still spewed out false information (and there is sufficient evidence that we reasonably knew there were no WMD)- why wasn’t his name thrown out there as being made a fool by making statements from the “Intell” community?

Scott B

McCain should start with Rep Jason Chaffetz (R-Utah), who in an interview could seem to gasp his own contradiction within the space of two consecutive questions that he accused the Obama administration for inadequate security at Benghazi, yet in his next response was simultaneously proud that the Republican led committees he sits on trimmed more that $500M from the budget that provides funds various agencies and armed services that protect the embassies, admitting that it results in reduced protection from less personnel having to be scattered throughout the world. The ignorance and hypocrisy is staggering.

Bill_GKD

Is that the guy who, when asked if he had any evidence that Fast and the Furious was some sort of administration attempt to curb gun rights in the U.S. by fueling violence in Mexico said something like “well, I don’t not have evidence”.
- Scott B
  
  If not him, there were several others basically saying the same thing.
OnPointComments

The State Department has stated that the budget had zero effect on security at the consulates and embassies. In testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, Charlene Lamb, a deputy assistant secretary of state for diplomatic security, was asked, “Was there any budget consideration and lack of budget which led you not to increase the number of people in the security force there?” Lamb responded, “No, sir.”
- Scott B
  
  That’s funny because Chaffetz admitted that reductions in budget meant less boots in some places because decisions had to be made.
  - OnPointComments
    
    The State Department statement stands on its own.
    - Scott B
      
      My larger point was that Chaffetz seemed to be blissfully ignorant, and incapable of seeing, the contradiction of his statements, regardless of who’s right here.

Flytrap

Obama has been indignant twice that I know of when asked a question and both times were when he was directly asked about Benghazi. It seems to me that indignation is a very effective way to avoid answering a question.

MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

When did McCain and Graham criticize Colin Powell for trusting the CIA/Scooter Libby assessment of WMD in Iraq?

NewtonWhale

Jack Beatty, you’re comment is foolish. You may have lots of problems with what the CIA was telling Amb. Rice, but your criticism of her is absurd. She was given the latest intelligence from those who are supposed to know. What is she supposed to do? Say nothing? Guess?

If you have a constructive criticism, by all means make it.
But you regularly criticize Obama and members of his administration without offering a realistic suggestion as to what they should do instead.

That makes you an enabler of the frothing right wing, which has nothing but contempt for the reality based community, and attacks for the sake of venting its spleen.

J__o__h__n

Don’t forget the Keating Five when listing scandals.

Scott B

McCain and Graham are having a massive case of sour grapes for the last 8 years.

Denis

Tom,
Will you please stop promoting the “let’s not let President Obama govern” crowd? Just because some random Senator is willing to say the sky is green does not make it so.
Do you and your guests think leaked statements by partisan legislators from a closed door secret session is really credible?

WorriedfortheCountry

Apparently Tom lifted his blackout on all Libyan news.

The election must be over.

StilllHere

Sad but true. Time to try to be a journalist again.

http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

“Watergate, Iran-Contra sized style investigation” and “Why do you think McCain is so adamant about this tack with Benghazi?”, Tom asks (my paraphrase).

Because McCain is a bitter loser who has realized that nothing hee ever does will keep him from being seen as a “maverick”, and he wanted to get Benghazi in the same sentence with Iran-Contra and Watergate.

PS Bonus points for the first mainstream media sort to point out how much the Beltway Inbreds ignored or downplayed the findings of the Iran-Contra hearings then, but refer to them as a big scandal now.

Davesix6

You simply won’t find two more “moderate” Republican Senators than McCain and Graham.
The questions on Benghazi begin with why our Ambassador was in Benghazi on September 11th to begin with.
All other western countrys had removed their diplomats by this time.
Requests, repeatedly made, for increased security by Amb. Stevens and others were all turned down.
One of the last requests was made directly to Secretary Clinton.
There are a multitude of questions yet to be answered by President Obama and his administration concerning Benghazi.

http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

You simply won’t find two more “moderate” Republican Senators than McCain and Graham

Oh, you got that right. But I think that means something different than you think it means.
- Davesix6
  
  “Oh, you got that right. But I think that means something different than you think it means.”
  
  Okay I’ll bite, like what?
  - Bill_GKD
    
    Probably that they’re not all that moderate, at least not McCain anymore, which says something about moderation in the GOP.
    - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
      
      I could barely have said it better myself. Good job!
      
      With two caveats:
      
      Nothing these two guys do will get them described as anything but “moderate” in our press corpse, with a special title of “mavericky” for McCain.
      
      And also the McCains and Grahams are not going to give up anything real lest they leave their right flanks to a primary challenge by Teabaggers. It may happen that one of them would tell the Tea folks to toss off, but I wouldn’t bet the future of good policy on it.
    - Davesix6
      
      Bill, TF, looks like you two are confusing a moderate Republican with a RINO.
      
      Would love to know your definition of a moderate Democrat.
Potter

Moderate and Republican seems to be an oxymoron and McCain is looking like one.

OMA_OPINES

How about John Huntsman for Secretary of State? Has already been an ambassador. Has a brain and great people skills. The only GOP primary candidate that we progressives were nervous about. Bipartisan. Smart. Think about it.

skeptic150

Agree
StilllHere

The litmus test seems to be whether he’d be willing to lie for the administration.
- OMA_OPINES
  
  Lying is willingly and knowingly saying something that is not true (usually to hurt someone or make yourself look smarter). It is not speaking to the best of one’s ability from known and accepted info at the time.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    Hey, some people have magic hindsight powers that allow them to judge people now for not knowing then what we know now. It’s a supernatural power that seems to be widely held by the TOP these days. For instance: you have conflicting intelligence accounts. By advancing a line that was in line with some accounts, which turn out to not be true as more evidence comes to light, one knew the absolute truth then and was therefore lying.
  - StilllHere
    
    Gotcha, she was willfully ignorant for political expediency.

BHA_in_Vermont

Romney, like Rove, thinks he is ENTITLED to win. Time to bury his head back in the clouds.

IsaacWalton

Some rich (and thereby powerful) believe they are entitled to EVERYTHING in this world. Sad really.
MrNutso

Romney wanted to be elected President. That ambition blinded him to the fact that win as a Republican he could not win a general election.
TomK_in_Boston

Lord R is all the things he claims to hate. As a pampered son of a CEO-governor he has been ENTITLED to an elite education, plenty of $ for anything he wanted to do, and an entree to the financial con industry. He has had a major dose of rich white boy AFFIRMATIVE ACTION. Never doing an honest days work, his “business” is manipulating assets and balance sheets, “robbing you with a fountain pen instead of a 6 gun”. He is a TAKER, a parasite on the real economy. I hope he is gone for good.

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN

AlexisJanos

The on air comment that the military didn’t have enough force in place to protect the CIA and diplomatic personnel in Benghazi is rubbish. It’s been shown that had the “OK” been given by our Commander in Chief, an F-16 based in Italy could have been over Benghazi with 25 minutes. This lack of leadership that allowed these four heroes to be killed needs to be addressed. This is such a bigger scandal than Watergate.

IsaacWalton

Dear Jim you have no idea what you’re talking about. STOP talking in absolutes. You’re showing your ignorance.

anamaria23

I happened upon a report given on NPR last week by a �
NYTimes correspondent stationed in Cairo. Sorry, name escapes me
He went to Benghazi and, after extensive interviews with actual witnesses,
learned thus:
After the atttacks on the embassy in Egypt, elicited by the video, word spread quickly to Libya. Protests
related to the video erupted at Benghazi. Emboldened by these protests, already formed militias with vague allegiances and a stash of weapons were able to pull together, in a matter of hours, and stage an attack. Ambassador Stevens was at this consulate infrequently and came for a special event.
�
Other consididerations about whether security was adequate may be valid.
This was a tragedy and needs to be examined with an open mind.
(Response to worried For The country)

WorriedfortheCountry

I agree. Let’s have an open mind.

The McCain, Graham, Ayotte proposal of a select committee seems very reasonable for this simple reason. The congressional oversight of intelligence, State and defense are currently in separate committees in both the House and Senate. It makes sense to combine them into a single investigation in this case so they don’t go around in circles.

Regarding the ‘protests’, they have been debunked by everyone (including the WH) at this point. Hopefully, we will learn something from Patraeus today. They have the drone video which debunks that narrative.

http://profile.yahoo.com/GDAJT5IJ37LA3MEI57NNT7PNXA George

Nobody seems to talk about that there was a reporter affiliated
to NPR was at the demonstration in Benghazi and interviewed the militants which
seems mostly local militias.

MrNutso

I didn’t get any gifts. I guess I threw my vote away again.

Davesix6

The caller Jim is absolutely incorrect when he says the Patraeus affair was because of the “military culture”.
There are a lot of jobs that take one spouse away from another for long periods of time.
We each decide and are therefore responsible for our own actions.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Paolo-Caruso/1778940602 Paolo Caruso

Yes, they have needs, but the problem is that Patraeus’ needs were being exploited by foreign operatives, like these zionist-linked maronite lebanese socialite twins, who closely shmooze with CIA directors and soon-to-be sec. of defense (John Kerry) at their private homes. The Kelley girls may well probably be the daughter’s of extremist phalangists. The Benghazi affair is a red herring. This scandal runs far deeper.

DrewInGeorgia

All this Grandstanding about whether or not this was a terrorist attack (Benghazi). Of course it was a terrorist attack, look up the definition of terrorism. For the lazy among us I’ll cut to the chase: Terrorism is the systematic use of terror, often violent, especially as a means of coercion. In the international community, however, terrorism has no legally binding, criminal law definition. Kind of like a never ending war on an undefined enemy, no?

Organized? “People don’t just up and attack with AK’s and RPG’s” someone earlier said. Well not here in the US, at least not yet anyway. It might have something to do with the fact that there are many, many armed nutjobs ready to set it off at the drop of a hat in the region at any time, for any reason.

Any who are beating this drum don’t want answers, they want leverage. It’s ridiculous.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=15501837 Mohammadali Ghassemi

Hamas claims Israel violated peace/cease fire agreement. What were the terms of this agreement? Did Israel actually violate the agreement? If yes, how and when?

Davesix6

Excellent questions!

MrNutso

Mitch McConnell: Elections don’t mean d!ck.

BHA_in_Vermont

The time for McConnell to lead is NOW.

He ignores the FACT that 60% of the voters, including 40% of those who voted for Romney, think that the rich can kick in a bit more. To ignore that is to go against the will of the people he is presumably serving and who PAY his salary.

DO YOUR JOB!

OMA_OPINES

McConnell is, at the core, a rich, white man and likely racist. He needs to start by taking the sock out of his mouth. hard to listen to.
jefe68

Actually I think if you figure in Stillhere, Worried, and Gregg Smith that 40% goes down some.
Also all those secessionist might be factored in.

NewtonWhale

John McCain, you’ve gone down the rabbit hole.

In the immortal words of Buzz Lightyear, “You are a sad, strange little man, and you have my pity.”

Here’s what Rice said:

…we’ll want to see the results of that investigation to draw any definitive conclusions. But based on the best information we have to date, what our assessment is as of the present is in fact what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy

—BOB SCHIEFFER: Mm-Hm.

SUSAN RICE: —sparked by this hateful video. But soon after that spontaneous protest began outside of our consulate in Benghazi, we believe that it looks like extremist elements, individuals, joined in that—in that effort with heavy weapons of the sort that are, unfortunately, readily now available in Libya post-revolution. And that it spun from there into something much, much more violent.

And here’s what the CIA’s talking points for Rice said:

“The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the US Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the US diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.

Kinda similar, no?

So basically John McCain’s entire hissy fit about how Susan Rice is not fit for office and he’s going to filibuster her because Americans died and it’s somehow her fault is because five days later she competently delivered CIA talking points. Of course, we all know it’s really because he’s still bitter he got trounced in 2008.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/11/16/1162248/-McCain-s-Rice-rage-would-be-better-directed-at-the-CIA

MadMarkTheCodeWarrior

Poll have shown that even 2/3 of Republicans support raising taxes on the wealthy. Why is there debate here?

Jasoturner

Because the remaining 1/3 of republicans have all the money. And they own the politicians. That’s why there isn’t debate here, just no-tax theology.
Bill_GKD

Because you can’t listen to the will of the people when it conflicts with ideology.

J__o__h__n

Selfish and stubborn are the real reasons why Mitch McConnell supports putting tax cuts for the rich before addressing the fiscal cliff.

http://www.facebook.com/people/Paolo-Caruso/1778940602 Paolo Caruso

Mitch McConnell is living proof that one can indeed “tell a book by its cover”. He looks like a creep and is a creep.
- Mike_Card
  
  Kentucky can only scrape up McConnell and Ayn Rand Paul to send to the US Senate. Sounds like a state in real need of disaster aid.
OnPointComments

Class warfare is the real reason why President Obama and the Democrats are willing to hold the country ransom and push us over the fiscal cliff unless they get the additional taxes from “the rich” that will fund government spending for 8 days. Years ago when ABC’s Charlie Gibson interviewed Obama, Obama said that he would raise capital gains taxes. Gibson told him that every time capital gains taxes were raised, revenue went down, and when capital gains taxes were lowered, revenue went up. Gibson then asked if Obama would raise the tax even if it meant revenues went down, and Obama answered yes he would, for purposes of “fairness.” That’s Obama in a nutshell: the arbiter of fairness and of who has been too successful, even if it comes at the cost of helping solve the country’s problems. God help us.
- Bill_GKD
  
  I don’t think that the statement that revenues went down when capital gains rates were raised is correct. Capital gains rates went up in 1987 and so did revenues. Same in 1991 and 1993.
  - OnPointComments
    
    I don’t know if the statement is correct, but it is what was said in the interview, and it wasn’t refuted at that time.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      If you check the historic budget tables, then the only years that revenues went down in the past 40 years were from 1982-1983 and from 2000-2001-2002-2003. It might not have been challenged at the time, but I don’t think that the statement is correct.

DrewInGeorgia

The BP fine is a joke.

Mike_Card

Whatever happened to “corporations are people, too?” At least we’ve discovered that the price of a human life is $1B.
Mike_Card

2 dead, 2 missing, 4 injured in the rig explosion off Grand Isle, LA. Possible BP participation in that well.
http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

I want to hear percentages. Because, between you, and me, and everyone posting here today, our paychecks together wouldn’t be worth stopping and picking up to the B of Ds of a multinational energy corporation.

And someone to explain, in every story on it, what the word “punitive” means.

skeptic150

Imo, we have to raise tax revenues to pay for the enormous bipartisan debt. We ALL need to suck it up and pay it off – personally, I would be in favor of a flat tax of 17-20% (for those above the poverty level). The continued Republican hardline “no tax increases” is getting old (and probably driven by the “Norquist” pledge).

OnPointComments

A flat tax of 17-20% would at a minimum double the tax revenues, eliminate the annual deficit, and be a big step in paying off the national debt. But it would never pass the Congress or the White House. Part of the fiction that is perpetrated on the citizens is that we can have an expansive government that provides a plethora of benefits and services to everyone, and that all of this can be paid for by taxing only 20% of the population.
- Bill_GKD
  
  Come one, you know that the GOP would never vote for it. They’re against raising taxes, right, so why raise taxes on millions upon millions of poor and middle class families. It would help them cut taxes on a few wealthy people, so maybe they would vote for it.
  - OnPointComments
    
    As I said, I don’t believe it would pass the Congress or the White House, Republicans and Democrats included. The primary goal of nearly everyone in Congress is to assure their own re-election; everything else is secondary.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      I figured that you were just jabbing the Democrats. Sorry to imply that you’re not an equal opportunity critic.

StilllHere

Susan Rice lied to the American people.

WorriedfortheCountry

She was told to lie per Obama. Leave her alone.

The election is over. Move along.
- StilllHere
  
  Right, what was I thinking, promote her!
  - Gregg Smith
    
    That’s the rub.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    He could pull a Bush and give her a medal, except for that she didn’t oversea the gathering of a bunch of poor intelligence that got us into a war, so maybe she doesn’t deserve one after all.
    - StilllHere
      
      You could be right, once she stops lying for Obama we’ll figure it out.
- Mike_Card
  
  Source?
jimino

In your world she would get the Presidential Medal of Honor like Tenet, Bremer and Franks got from “W”. Or do we need to spend a few trillion dollars and have hundreds of thousands of casualties due to arrogance and incompetence before one qualifies?

OjosCriollos

There’s information missing in these discussions. 1. The discussion on Gaza is, naturally, biased in favor of Israel, despite appearing to be even-handed. Corporate media never includes the fact that occupied people have the right to resist. Your caller is incorrect about not hearing about the missiles fired from Gaza. That’s all we hear about. The Gaza Strip has been under siege for years, since Hamas gained control, after a failed coup orchestrated by the US and Israel. The double standards are extraordinary when it comes to Israel, which is only a fierce ally of the US because most US citizens don’t know the truth, thanks to the general Israel Lobby, which influences the media (see the film ‘Peace, Propaganda, and the Promised Land: US Media and the Israel-Palestine Conflict’). Israel has never stopped its war against the Palestinians, and announced recently, while we were distracted by elections, that they were approving even more illegal building in the West Bank. Israel is sadistic, and everyone insists that Palestinians behave like masochists!

2. John McCain is a fool. Watergate-style hearings? Where’s the crime? The crime was the war against Libya, which McCain supported, and supports overtly aiding terrorists groups in Syria to overthrow the Assad government. Why are so many in the media ignoring the NYT’s investigative piece by David Kirkpatrick in which he reported that the “notorious” offensive anti-Muslim video did indeed motivate the attacks on the consulate in Benghazi. Robin Young, of ‘Here and Now,’ has interviewed Kirkpatrick and seems to be one of the few people who acknowledge that article’s existence.
I had a question about the revelation that the annex to the consulate was a CIA outpost. Was there reason to delay that revelation, fearing further inflaming people in the region, even though it’s fairly well known, and often denied, that foreign embassies and consulates are in fact CIA installations?

Let’s hear from Jeremy Scahill, who agrees that the CIA has been militarized, especially with Patraeus at the helm. It would be true poetic justice if he were to die by a drone attack.

3. BP: There’s still no word on all the people whose health has been harmed by the BP oil disaster. Please do a program on that, interviewing people like plaintiff attorney Stuart Smith, of New Orleans, who has worked with toxicologists. People have indeed died and become acutely and chronically ill from exposure to the toxins.

WorriedfortheCountry

Israel watched 800 missiles invade their land and then responded. Israel attacked the man who boasted responsibility for those missiles. Should they have waited for 801? 1000?

If someone was firing missiles at you I bet you would respond.
anamaria23

I believe I heard the same interview with Kirkpatrick. I found it convincing from one who interviewed actual witnesses. I mentioned it in a post below.

http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF

“If the President thought Mitt Romney could help with a big important bipartisan piece of legislation, Obama shold reach out,” per Ignatius.

Words fail me. No Republicans in Congress like Romney. Once more, the mainstream media falls into the trap of “Obama has to be…some undefined nicer and somehow more compromising.” That smacks of observers who will say no matter what the President does for the other side that it isn’t enough.

Oh, and can we get an economist on this show to talk about the FiscalCliff(TM)?

StilllHere

Surprising jump in jobless claims the week after the election, especially in Ohio and Pennsylvania. Obama’s “record of job creation” there already in reverse.

Bill_GKD

It’s a good thing that one week is an excellent and accurate predictor of the future.
anamaria23

AP reports 78,000 related to Hurricane Sandy.
- StilllHere
  
  Yes, Ohio and Pennsylvania were right in the path of Sandy and then she went after Hostess plants.
  - anamaria23
    
    Why do you find that FACT so threatening? It is just a fact.

jackalope

Tom: Interesting that nobody points out the irony of Mitt Romney’s claim to his wealthy donors that Obama won because of his gift giving. In his next breath, he could well be saying, “And were I President-elect, I’d be making sure that all of you, whom President Bush called his ‘base,’ would not only keep the tax cuts that he gave you but I’d be cutting your taxes even more.”

And it is just as interesting that nobody, including yourself and others in the media business, refuse to raise history as part of political discussions. For example, if McCain and Graham are so upset about the Rice – Benghazi issue as one of principle in which the government did not tell everybody the whole and complete truth from the beginning, then they should be asked to account for their refusal to call out the government for taking the country into war in Iraq based on inaccurate and partial information. Of course they would say, “That is not the issue under discussion here.” To which the reply is, “The issue under discussion is the principle of your claim as well as the specifics.” Another example: if those who say they are deficit hawks now were not also deficit hawks between 2000 and 2008, when our government created a huge debt based on doling out tax breaks while fighting two wars on credit, then they need to account for their inconsistencies. If you and others in the media were to bring history into the discussion it would do much to improve our political discourse in this country, no matter which party is in power.

J__o__h__n

Where were the Republicans when Bush nominated the NSA director who ignored an August 9, 2001 report titled “Bin Laden Determined to Attack inside the United States” to be Sec of State?

Bill_GKD

Still looking for the mobile chemical weapons labs in Iraq.
OnPointComments

I appreciate all of the On Point commenters’ deeply-held admiration for President Bush and his administration. I’m assuming that it must be admiration since they incessantly refer to what President Bush did as the standard for everyone to follow.
�
How to tell if questioning is getting uncomfortable: the President deflects the question and changes the subject, or another On Point commenter says “What about what President Bush did.”
- Bill_GKD
  
  I always like to hear how some commentators were just as opposed to the actions of Bush as they are to Obama’s. It makes me wonder who supported George for 8 years.
  - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
    
    You’re in luck!
    
    There’s a one in 100 trillion chance of it happening, but everyone on the right who hated Bush’s Unitary Executive, liberty-erosion, library-spying, threat-rainbow-kajiggering, and such is on this very webpage.
    
    They statistically exist in the dozens, and by some miracle, they’re all here now!
- StilllHere
  
  So true. They’re all relativists and can’t find a point to pivot off of.
  - Bill_GKD
    
    Please, tell us again how Patreus’s affair is Obama’s fault, Mr. Personal Responsibility. If my boss likes beer with dinner, then can I blame him for my co-workers DUI? That’s probably Obama’s fault too. None of those words were too big for you, were they? I could use small ones if necessary.
    - StilllHere
      
      A. I don’t think you could use big words.
      B. You are definitely off your meds.
      C. I believe you’re drinking right now.
      D. It’s clear you’ve got small ones.
      E. Please refer to the Petreus discussion for the answers you seek. It doesn’t appear to be a topic of interest today.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Easy there TC, don’t you have some kids to drive off of your lawn or something? I’ll give you credit. I didn’t think that you could string more than two sentences together in a post. Keep working on it. You might just be able to pass a GED and get a job someday rather than living off of the productive members of society.

jackalope

Stillhere: Isn’t OjosCriollos’s point that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land and Israel’s apartheid policy regarding Palestinians needs to be discussed?

Gregg Smith

Twinkies bites the dust with another 18,000 jobs. Blame it on the unions as if Obama’s reelection hasn’t empowered them.

1Brett1

You can just stockpile them for the end of the world; I hear they have quite a long shelf life!
- MrNutso
  
  Digging up my Zombieland DVD.
Steve__T

They did it to themselves. don’t blame the unions, they paid the top to much, and tried to make the workers pay for their 85% increase in salaries and got caught in bankruptcy court,
Bill_GKD

I’m sure that it’s got nothing to do with a long struggling company that jacked up executive pay while trying to cut worker compensation and the workers not wanting to go along with it. Maybe if the executives had been willing to share in the sacrifice instead of padding their bank accounts, then maybe they would have found the workers to be more willing to work with them.
- anamaria23
  
  And people aren’t eating Twinkies quite so much in light of 21st century research revealing what sugar laden, overly processed food does to the human body.
  - 1Brett1
    
    Come on, anamaria, let’s ‘fess up; the jig’s up! You know when we “liberals” on here have our secret meetings to discuss how we are going to systematically destroy the US, we talk about how Obama was going to ruin the Twinkie market and force Hostess into bankruptcy! –No, wait, I forgot you weren’t at that one meeting when Twinkie destruction was an agenda item; you were at that “how to get Obama to give us free stuff” workshop…sorry, I forgot…Anyway, looks like you guys got a lot accomplished at your workshop; I’ll have to high-five you at our next meeting. (First agenda item at the next meeting: 1) how can we help Obama destroy the world and imprison all the white people?)
    - anamaria23
      
      What a strange post considering that I am an ardent supporter of the President and have indicated as much in my posts.
      I say again-people just aren’t eating as many Twinkies which adds to the company’s demise.
    - StilllHere
      
      Wow, apparently you crossed a line and Brett is going to make you pay for it. You better get on message or much more abuse is likely to come your way.
    - anamaria23
      
      All is well.
    - 1Brett1
      
      um…reread my comment thinking I was using satire; it might seem less odd. (Hint: I’m a liberal.)
      
      P.S.- I enjoy your comments, and agree with many of them (I even “like” many of them, including the one I initially replied to about Twinkies not selling because they are just outdated, sugar-laden, processed crap).
    - http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
      
      I got your deadpan on this one. Pretty good show.
      
      Of course, I know a bit of your history.
TomK_in_Boston

You can’t expect a company to stay in business and keep pouring wealth onto the top execs unless the peons agree to chinese wages, right?

In the righty alt universe, you don’t deserve a job if you bargain for decent wages, but the execs keep raking it in even if they trash the company.

My first thought when I read this story was to wonder if Bane capital owned hostess
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  “My first thought when I read this story was to wonder if Bane capital owned hostess ”
  
  Figures. Tom, we get it now. Everything is Romney’s fault.
  - StilllHere
    
    Tom missed the memo on how great everything is, or else he’s just a whiner; suppose it could be both.
  - TomK_in_Boston
    
    Hey, some things are W’s fault and plenty are Clinton’s fault.
    
    Geez, class warfare 101. If the workers don’t behave like good sheep, declare bankruptcy, bust the pension fund, and open your golden parachute. Maybe sell the company to a vulture capital co. It’s not too late for Bane to step in. Nothing new here after 32 years of voodoo economics.
hypocracy1

Yes, since it was the unions fault and not poor management that forced Hostess to file for Bankrupcy twice..
J__o__h__n

You can be more creative than that. Blame Michelle Obama’s healthy food plot.
- Bill_GKD
  
  Is that still going on? I thought that Sarah Palin’s cookie protest drove those healthy eating crazies back to their vegetable gardens.
JGC

No Twinkies for Thanksgiving dinner. NOW I am angry. If only I had voted for Romney…
StilllHere

Apparently Sandy was involved as well.
pete18

Unreasonable union demands could easily be the likely cause but so could mismanagement or a combination of both. I don’t think there’s enough info in any of the stories I’ve seen to know yet.
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  According to the class warriors any bargaining for decent wages is “unreasonable” and an excuse for bankruptcy, and then the execs can loot the company and renege on any obligations.
  
  In romney America, the only way to have a job is to agree to chinese wages. In righty newspeak that’s called “being competitive”.
  - pete18
    
    It’s fun setting up those straw men to knock down, isn’t it Tom?
StilllHere

It was already in bankruptcy and the union thugs got greedy, goodbye pensions. I bet you could move manufacturing to China and ship product on slow boats, no hurry or just in time inventory replenishment required.
JGC

Hang on to your Ding Dongs, everyone, because Hostess isn’t dead yet! It sounds like they will be undergoing liquidation and be up for sale to a new buyer. Perhaps the Twinky factory will end up in Colorado or Washington state, where I hear there is strong local demand for snack foods. �
- http://profile.yahoo.com/JXSANCUDPIKQSPID5KT2U4XK5Y TF
  
  Hang on to your Ding Dongs, everyone
  
  Not in public, please.
  
  But the idea of “strategic bankruptcy for me (corporations), debtor’s prison for thee (individuals)” rears its head yet again.

WorriedfortheCountry

Ms. Rice was sent out to FIVE Sunday talk shows to ‘present’ a false narrative.

Mr. Obama responded (with faux outrage) at the press conference for McCain to lay off Ms. Rice because she was just presenting what she was told and she knew nothing about Benghazi.

OK. But WHY did the WH send Ms. Rice out to represent Benghazi to the American people. Why didn’t they send out Clinton, Panetta, Patraeus, Clapper etc? They were all available and are all key players.

Did Hillary refuse to go on the shows? She would have been the most logical representative.

StilllHere

Rice got the short straw, or she’s the best liar of the bunch. The liberal hosts of those shows don’t ask Democrat women tough questions and Hillary can’t be sullied with Benghazi b/c of her 16 run.
brettearle

The Benghazi imbroglio is one of the most hyped incidents in recent Media memory.

Of course, it’s a tragedy.

But even in a pre 9/11 world–much more in a post 9/11 world–security and communications are going to break down somewhere, somehow. Deaths are GOING to occur.
It’s inevitable.

And, especially after such an attack, reports can well be mercurial and unclear–for quite some time. Contradictions are almost inevitable.

This story doesn’t simply have strong legs, it has the tentacles of a GOP MEDIA BUZZ HYDRA.

Graham’s comments and McCain’s comments are simply outrageous, as the President suggests.

But, indeed, the entire inflated, politicized aspect of this matter, by the GOP and by the Right Wing Media Attack Machine, is equally OUTRAGEOUS.
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  If the admin was transparent then this wouldn’t be a big deal right now. Their behavior in the aftermath smells of cover up.
  
  What is stunning is the compliant MSM. The first press conference in 8 months was pathetic. Only 8 questions and almost zero followup. And half the questions were inane.
  - brettearle
    
    I agree with you that Obama should hold more press conferences [although his predecessor was certainly lacking in that category as well].
    
    Cover-up implies there was WRONGdoing.
    
    Your malignant cynicism of Democrats, and of the current administration, is what is making you SAY THERE IS COVER-UP…. …..implying there was WRONGdoing
    
    It’s a bunch of bull.
    
    Tragedies are GOING to happen.
    
    You are looking at a tempest in a tea pot, my friend.
    
    It’s not as if all of Tripoli was eviscerated.
    
    Tragedies occur all the time when civilizations, when countries, when ethnic groups, and when religious groups clash.
    
    Security is never full proof, nor always prepared.
    
    Anytime there’s a tragedy it is easy for a President’s detractors to second-guess–because that is where their expertise lies:
    
    In bias and in blame. Not in analysis.
    
    Congratulations for falling into the simple and easy category of oblivion and blindness.

Bill_GKD

Report just out of an explosion on an oil platform in the Gulf of Mexico with casualties. Hopefully no fatalities and no extreme environmental fallout like last time.

Mike_Card

2 dead, 2 missing, 4 injured in the rig explosion off Grand Isle, LA. Possible BP participation in that well.
- Bill_GKD
  
  That’s just terrible on all fronts.
- StilllHere
  
  possible, don’t wait for the facts, fine them now
  - Bill_GKD
    
    Why, this is probably just Obama’s fault anyways.
    - StilllHere
      
      Now you’re thinking.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      No I’m not, I’m just not thinking like you.
    - StilllHere
      
      It hurts using your brain which is probably why you don’t do it much.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      I can only infer from your comments here that if you ever had one, then you certainly don’t use yours much, even if you could pull it out of wherever you currently have it crammed.
    - StilllHere
      
      Infer …sounds like you’ve stopped using yours again. Probably safer for you to live in ignorance.
    - Bill_GKD
      
      I don;t know, is it safe there in your mornonic little spit of land that you cling to wheree everything is the fault of Obama and the Democrats. Diddn’t you sayu the other day that Patraeus’s affair was Obama’s fault. Typical right wing idiocy.

WorriedfortheCountry

Senator Patty Murray is lobbying to be chairperson of the Senate budget committee.

However, she won’t commit to a budget out of the Senate.

You can’t make this stuff up.

OnPointComments

Just what the country needs: Patty “Pork Chop” Murray in charge of the budget. You’re right, you can’t make this stuff up.
StilllHere

If it’s a do-nothing you’re looking for, Dicky Durbin is the man for the job. He can do nothing better than anybody.
OnPointComments

Today’s quote from Patty “Pork Chop” Murray: “If Republicans do not agree to let tax cuts expire for Americans making over $250,000 per year, the country should go over the fiscal cliff.” It amazes me that people can support these liberals who are perfectly content to hold the country ransom to their demands, and to inflict financial calamity on everyone if they don’t get their way. Similar to Bill Buckley’s quote that “Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked & offended to discover that there are other views,” liberals are willing to compromise, provided everyone changes to their point of view.

OnPointComments

Some good questions from everyone’s favorite pundit:
�
If Susan Rice “had nothing to do with Benghazi,” why was she sent out “at the request of the White House” to explain Benghazi?
�
Who at the White House programmed Rice?
�
Who was the source of that “intelligence” given to Rice about the protest in Benghazi?
�
When Obama said Rice “gave her best understanding of the intelligence that had been provided to her,” was that also the best intelligence the President of the United States had?
�
And more.
�
http://www.humanevents.com/2012/11/16/pat-buchanan-who-fed-susan-the-benghazi-bullhockey/

1Brett1

Looks like you’ve blown this whole thing wide open! I guess one has to get up pretty early in the morning to pull one over on you! Here’s what happened:

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/david/dick-morris-georgia-lawmakers-meet-over-obam
- Steve__T
  
  WOW
StilllHere

Sorry, you’ve come to the wrong place for answers to these good questions.

Now here’s a pathetic diversion dance from Brett…
- 1Brett1
  
  Oh, yeah, why don’t you give him the “answers” he seeks?
  
  Your lack of humor recognition is further indication of your mind playing Pong in a World of Warcraft ocean.
  
  Please, tell us more about your inside intel and covert relationships with the key players in this situation. We should all consider ourselves lucky to have such an esteemed operative, such as yourself, to feed us classified information.
hennorama

Anyone concerned about Amb. Rice’s remarks on the Sunday talk shows should read The Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) Sept. 28, 2012 statement on Benghazi, and the CIA talking points that were prepared on Sept. 15, 2012, the very day Amb. Rice taped her TV appearances. Then compare those items with Amb. Rice’s nuanced remarks.

The ODNI statement reads, in part:

“In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to Executive Branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. Throughout our investigation we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving.”

Note that they didn’t say it was due to “the video” but only that it “began spontaneously following” the Cairo Embassy incident. They noted the timing, not any causation.

They later changed their assessment, indicating the attack “… was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists.”

Source:http://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/96-press-releases-2012/731-statement-by-the-odni-s-director-of-public-affairs-on-intelligence-related-to-the-terrorist-attack-on-the-u-s-consulate-in-benghazi

Amb. Rice’s remarks are also in complete agreement with the CIA talking points prepared on Sept. 15, 2012. They read in part “The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. Consulate and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.”

source:http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/benghazi-attack-becomes-political-ammunition/2012/10/19/e1ad82ae-1a2d-11e2-bd10-5ff056538b7c_story.html

Amb. Rice’s televised statements said ONLY that the Benghazi attack occurred AFTER AND IN REACTION TO the Cairo incidents. Here are 3 quotes of what she said on Sept. 16, 2012:

On CBS: “…what began spontaneously in Benghazi as a reaction to what had transpired some hours earlier in Cairo where, of course, as you know, there was a violent protest outside of our embassy—-sparked by this hateful video.”

On ABC: “…this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo. In Cairo, as you know, a few hours earlier, there was a violent protest that was undertaken in reaction to this very offensive video..”

On Fox: “…what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video.”

This is highly politicized “much ado about nothing” when it comes to Amb. Rice’s remarks.
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  Why did the WH send Susan Rice as their spokesperson? Obama admitted that she knew nothing about Benghazi in this weeks presser.
  
  It is amazing that you continue to contort yourself in strange positions to cover for this White House. Do you work for them or for OFA?

SuziVt

I can’t understand why there are so many people that believe we should jump behind Israel every time they cry foul. If they didn’t treat the Palestinians like yesterday’s garbage, I would hope that much, if not all, this violence would stop. All this entitlement on their side and then retaliation on both sides is so archaic and is difficult to stomach, let alone to support. I know many people that do NOT support Israel and do not believe our govt. should give them unconditional support. They should get over it and stop expecting this free ride.

WorriedfortheCountry

How many missiles would accept Suzi raining down on you and your neighbors? Israel waited for the 800th missile to retaliate against the person who boasted responsibility. Israel showed incredible restraint.
- Bill_GKD
  
  Would you be angry enough to launch missiles at somebody if people on another continent gave most of your country away to other people and consigned you to a few bits of land? I don’t think that there’s an excuse for violence most of the time, but the Palestinians have gotten the real raw end of the deal for most of the last century.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Yes, they’ve gotten a raw deal from their own corrupt leaders and Arab dictators who have used them as pawns.
    
    So you think the missile attacks from Gaza are justified?
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Did I say that? No. I said that most of the time that there isn’t an excuse for violence, and I would say that this is one of those times. Regardless of what deal they got from their leaders, they still got screwed over when the West gave away their land to other people. Wouldn’t you be pissed if someone in Europe gave your house away to someone else with a tenuous centuries old claim?
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      Are you referring to the missile attacks BEFORE the Israeli retaliation as being justified?
  - brettearle
    
    Oh, yes, of course, Bill_GKD, of course.
    
    Hamas’s attacks on Israel aren’t simply because of the last century.
    
    It’s because Israel has no claim to the land, whatsoever, Mr. Bill_GKD. Isn’t that so correct?
    
    Why Israel has no historical right to the land, at all!….of course, of course.
    
    Because History, and Scripture, and Archaeology agree with you, now don’t they?
    
    The original Jews, for centuries and centuries, were in New York City and Mexico City and Ethiopia and in Warsaw and Berlin and in Shaker Heights.
    
    How dare the Jews migrate from those places and claim land, thousands of miles away–when THEY WERE NEVER THERE TO BEGIN WITH.
    
    Isn’t that correct, Mr. Bill_GKD.
    
    How DARE THEY?
    
    Your comments truly add remarkable quality to the discourse.
    
    As a matter of fact, I would say they’re Earth-shift changing.
    
    Yesireee!
    
    Have we got it right, yet?
    - Bill_GKD
      
      Tell me, do you live on any land once claimed by Native Americans? I would suspect that you do, and if so, then what right to your land do their modern descendents have? Certainly the ancestors of some modern Jews came from the Holy Land, but I don’t think that the Bible or that historical claim gives them a right to take land from the people who have been inhabiting it for these past 1300 or so years.
    - brettearle
      
      Not only is America guilty of genocide–whether we like to believe it or not–but we as Americans should not simply be MORALLY deferential to American Indians.
      
      But we should grant them significant latitude, freedoms, and reparations in many aspects of contemporary life.
      
      Indeed, technically–based on actual History–it has been an ongoing war crime that we have not done so, for centuries.
      
      But that does NOT invalidate all the great things that the US has done; nor should the US not have a significant defense and security system to protect itself.
      
      Where are Israel’s casinos?
      
      Shall we have Israel live on reservations?
      
      Go ahead, cry Apartheid on the West Bank and in Gaza, if you want to.
      
      But your perception, my friend, would be looking at it from the point of view
      of Germans, Austrians, and the Arab Empire.
      
      It IS the Jordanians and their fellow countrymen, in the region, who have exercised special heartlessness, over the years, in treating the Palestinians as fourth class citizens.
      
      And FYI, my friend, I deplore Israel’s policy on the settlements and its need to control Jerusalem.
      
      BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN IT SHOULD SIT THERE AND BE FIRED UPON, DAY AFTER DAY, WITHOUT RETALIATION.
      
      You’re full of bull.
      
      YOU CAN ONLY SEE ONE SIDE.
      
      THAT’S THE PROBLEM WITH THE CONFLICT.
      
      NO ONE CAN SEE BOTH SIDES.
- SuziVt
  
  I don’t believe in fighting for a home your ancestors occupied centuries ago. Get over it and move on. Israel is trying to take back land they believe historically belongs to them. Meanwhile they are bulldozing homes the Palestinians are living in right now. Why, in the name of entitlement? What if the Indians wanted to take our land and burned down our homes because we stole it from them? First of all, I’m sorry, but that is NOT the way you find a solution to the problem. Secondly, I stole nothing, however this land WAS stolen from them long before my family lived here, however, we did profit from that atrocity.
  I would hope that we could reach a compromise through discussion. Please spare me the excuse that the Palestinians are not willing to compromise. Who is grabbing up every bit of property on the west bank that they can get their bulldozers on? Compromise isn’t, do as we say and take what we allow you to take. How many of those in Israel are American Jews that could have had a perfectly comfortable life in the states? I asked two friends(doctor & lawyer), one evening, “Why does the United States give unconditional support to Israel?” Their answer was emphatic, “Don’t ask us, and we’re both Jews!”
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    They will NEVER reach a compromise as long as Hamas (or whomever represents the Palestinian people) believes that Israel has no right to any existence and needs to be wiped out. 8M people.
    
    btw – there are 300K US citizens living in Israel.
    - SuziVt
      
      Excuse me, but how can you not see that Israel has bulldozed EXISTING houses that Palestinian families were living in, you know …children? There is not blame on one side here. Obviously Israel wants to segregate the Palestinians to an ever smaller and less valuable piece of property, much like this country did to the Indians with their pitiful reservations.
OnPointComments

I don’t know who said this first, but I believe it is true: if the Muslims and Palestinians gave up their weapons tomorrow, there would be peace in the Middle East; if Israel gave up its weapons tomorrow, it would be destroyed.
- Bill_GKD
  
  Unfortunately, that’s probably pretty right on. I don’t think it would be all in, but there’d be some for sure.
- Zzzzz_zzzzz
  
  The statement you offered is simple and easy to remember, but it leaves out too much.
  
  The kind of peace the Palestinians would enjoy if they gave up their struggle would be the kind of peace the native American population enjoys on our reservations, characterized by political marginalization, poverty, the loss of community and tradition, the destruction of their culture in its entirety.
  
  And one has to wonder whether an existence that can only be maintained by the continual exercise of military violence against a hostage population is a righteous one.
- SuziVt
  
  That’s the same as saying, if the Palestinians settled for what we will allow them to have and didn’t pester us for more then there would be peace. I’m not saying the Palestinians wouldn’t take advantage of Israel if Israel had no weapons. I am saying that there is guilt to go around. It’s time that both peoples admitted their part in the violence. And Israel has to stop keeping the cream for themselves and expecting Palestine to happy with a little spoiled milk. With that mindset, there will NEVER EVER be peace. At the very least, both countries should do their own fighting and other countries should not be involved.
brettearle

No, of course Suzi….

Israel has no right to exist and to live in peace.

I forgot about that.

Why should they live in peace, where they are located?

After all, they have never been attacked since 1948, have they SuziVt?

They should kick themselves, out of there, shouldn’t they?

I mean why should we support them?

And why stop there?

Let’s not support Canada, Great Britain, or Japan.

We’ll throw those countries, in for good measure.

Or is it only Israel, Ms. Suzi?

Oh, they are so belligerent, aren’t they? They’re not like the others.

Why, after all, there are so many other countries who have enemies, who proclaim, publicly, that these other countries will be destroyed, now aren’t there?

But, NOT Israel. No one EVER threatens them, publicly….now do they SuziVT?

I mean, Israel doesn’t sit there month after month and endure and sustain rocket fire, after rocket fire, across their borders–without DOING ANYTHING, now does it?

SO THEN, FINALLY, ISRAEL HAS NO CHOICE BUT TO DEFEND ITSELF, AFTER HUNKERING DOWN FOR HUNDREDS OF DAYS….AND….

You know what?

SuziVt cries foul–because, after all, ISRAEL SIMPLY MUST SIT THERE AND TAKE IT,

Right, SuziVt?

Congratualtions on such an objective comment!
- Zzzzz_zzzzz
  
  For Israel to react with the amount of overwhelming force it does given the incredibly low number of casualties it has suffered as the result of Palestinian action is unjustifiable; this isn’t “you hit me, I hit you back,” this is “you hit me, I destroy your city.”
  
  Correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t believe that any Israeli civilians have been killed in this latest round of rocket attacks from Gaza.
  - brettearle
    
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’ve fallen ignorant victim to media reports that do not originate from the Gaza rocket launches that are enmeshed near children and private civilian families.
    
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but you’ve fallen victim to ignoring how many times Israel has been FIRED UPON in recent months–where every moment Israelis’ lives are being threatened.
    
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but deaths came to Jewish families–one in particular who just recently settled from India.
    
    Correct me if I’m wrong, but this so-called “Jewish justice” retaliation diatribe, is a sick rationale for how long and how often Israelis take BORDER POUNDINGS….before they finally fight back…..you jerk.
    - Zzzzz_zzzzz
      
      Brett,
      
      Just because you disagree with someone doesn’t mean that they’re a demon or that a civil conversation is impossible. If you’ll try to contain the discussion to this most recent episode in what you’ve rightly observed is a long history of Israeli/Palestinian violence, we can avoid blowing the whole thing up into a shouting match and we might learn something.
      
      It sounds like you and I are both concerned about the impact of these conflicts on civilians. I’m sure it is difficult to live in Israeli cities under fire from Gaza; it’s unfortunate that a civilian population has become little more than the medium through which extremist political statements are communicated. But that’s a direct result of the Israeli repression of Palestinians, the Israeli occupation of Palestinian land, the ascendance of a hawkish, right-wing Zionist government that takes every opportunity it can to further degrade the already embattled people of Palestine. There’s a stunning lack of imagination on display when the spectrum of Israeli responses to Hamas is full of nothing but military options.
      
      It’s natural that there will be border conflicts when the legitimacy of the border is contested; Israel’s “might makes right” attitude doesn’t change the fact that there are a great many people who take issue with its territorial claims. You’re right in asking me how much I expect Israel to endure before responding; how much do you think generations of Palestine have endured? I don’t say that to throw your question in your face; I say it seriously. At every moment, the lives of Palestinians are threatened by an authority it is beyond their power to challenge, and they don’t have a healthy civil infrastructure to back them up, to provide medical care, food, emergency response, bomb shelters, or defense.
      
      It’s hard to find empathy for those who you’ve imagined as your enemies, but it’s the first step in having a conversation, and that’s the first step towards understanding where they’re coming from.
    - brettearle
      
      I don’t expect you to study my positions on this thread today, nor in the past.
      
      The ONLY time I demonize is when I see a comment that vilifies only one side.
      
      Yours fell into that category.
      
      You may think that you were being reasonable.
      
      But you don’t wish to recognize that your comment
      seemed nothing more, nor less, than KNEE-JERK.
      
      Your comment suggested the following:
      
      –a superficial reading of recent events
      
      –a lack of understanding of the history of the conflicts and the politics
      
      –succumbing to the cliche of “overreactive Jewish justice”, without taking into account what the Israelis have been going through on their borders, for years.
      
      WITHOUT consistent retaliation.
      
      I have always deplored and condemned Israeli policy on settlements and on Jerusalem.
      
      Those policies are outrageous.
      
      I have even said it today, on this thread, before this comment here.
      
      If you are you are going to make a statement that takes into account only one side, then you are going to be called on it.
      
      And you should be.
    - Zzzzz_zzzzz
      
      I thought my response to you was pretty charitable considering the angry way you introduced yourself to me.
      
      Have a nice night!
    - brettearle
      
      I EXPLAINED to you, why I wasn’t as civil as I could have been.
      
      But not only did you ignore that,
      but you also ignored that my last comment above–was fairly CHARITABLE, in itself, much less in comparison to my comment before my last one.
      
      And you ignored all of that!
      
      DON’T YOU SEE THE PROBLEM, SIR?
      
      I bet that I get no response, here, back from you, acknowledging my point.
    - brettearle
      
      Outrageous that you, or anyone else, blames the Israelis for Palestinian adversity.
      
      Outrageous.
      
      The Palestinians wish to support and allow terrorists groups to lead them–ones that refuse to recognize Israel and are bound, as a lifelong commitment, to destroy the Jewish state.
      
      As long as the Palestinians sanction this sort of political and militant rule, you will see the Israelis being protective and, therefore, aggressive.
      
      That having been said, the Israelis are much, much too restrictive in their security policies that interfere with daily Palestinian life.
      
      I agree with that.
      
      But Israel is quite concerned, understandably, about arms and arms supplies getting through from Iran, Syria, and from other places.
      
      Also, Israeli positions on settlements and Jerusalem are outrageous.
      
      I also agree with that.
      
      But this business about the Palestinians being weak and Israel being strong is ridiculous biased, and outrageous.
      
      If you, as a distant observer, wish to react primitively, it is VERY easy to see the ones with more guns as strong and the ones with less guns as weak.
      
      And THAT is what you are doing.
- SuziVt
  
  Canada, Great Britain, and France are not involved in an ongoing war that is driven by grudges and greed. They are not at war last I knew. And who are you to accuse me of not being objective? Do you honestly feel you are open minded about this? I think not. At least I am trying to make a point as I see things and have not stooped to sarcasm. Another example of failed diplomacy.
  - brettearle
    
    NOT ONLY DO I CONDEMN ISRAEL FOR THEIR POLICIES ON SETTLEMENTS BUT I CONDEMN ISRAEL FOR THEIR POLICY ON JERUSALEM.
    
    I HAVE SAID IT FOR MONTHS ON THIS WEB SITE AND I HAVE ALREADY SAID IT TWICE ON THIS THREAD–BEFORE THIS COMMENT HERE.
    
    BUT THAT DOESN’T MEAN ISRAEL SHOULD BE ATTACKED AND THREATENED. IT DOESN’T MEAN THAT ISRAEL DOESN’T HAVE THE RIGHT TO EXIST, MUCH LESS EXIST AND BE AT PEACE WITH ITS NEIGHBORS.
    
    NOR SHOULD ISRAEL PUT UP WITH A HEAD OF STATE DECLARING THAT HIS COUNTRY INTENDS TO DESTROY ISRAEL.
    
    ANY TIME BUT BUT BUT BUT ANYTIME, ISRAEL IS CONDEMNED ON THIS THREAD, NEVER BUT NEVER NEVER NEVER DO I EVER HEAR THOSE PEOPLE WHO CONDEMN ISRAEL, CONDEMN THE OTHER SIDE AS WELL.
    
    WHAT, MS. SUZIVT, DOES THAT TELL ME ABOUT YOU, AND THE OTHERS, WHO CONDEMN ISRAEL?
    
    YOU WILL GREET MY COMMENT, HERE, WITH SILENCE BECAUSE IT IS YOU YOU YOU YOU WHO IS BEING SUBJECTIVE AND BIASED.
    
    BOTH….SIDES….ARE….AT….FAULT…
    
    AND THE SOONER WE ALL REALIZE THAT IT IS OUR BIASES THAT PREVENT US FROM SEEING THE REALITY OF THE SITUATION, THE SOONER THE MIDDLE EAST WILL FIND PEACE…..
    
    WHICH BASICALLY MEANS NEVER.
    - SuziVt
      
      I should greet your comment with silence, but I cannot resist. First, I don’t know exactly what you’re talking about.I have never said Israel should be attacked, nor have I thought it. I do not believe in violence. It’s for fools and control freaks. I do understand defending one’s self if under attack. I do not condone the Palestinians that attack. I condemn them as well. My gripe is that I do not believe we, the United States, should be bankrolling Israel. It isn’t our business. I resent those that believe it is our duty.�
      Secondly, you got me, what does that tell you about me? That I don’t believe in war as a solution to problems? That I do condemn violence on both sides? That I feel that I have the right to believe our�
      country shouldn’t be expected to take sides as well as fund and arm this endless war?
      Third, what is with the yelling and repetitive wording? What it tells me about you is that you have no tolerance for anyone that has an opposing view to yours.
      I was raised in a family that argued politics and religion, but we were always entitled to our own opinion and allowed to express it.
    - brettearle
      
      I heard you recognize Israel’s point of view–only AFTER I confronted you.
      
      Your bias is clear and obvious.
      
      And you hide your glaring bias behind how the US should withdraw support from Israel.
      
      What tipped me off?
      
      The typical cliched, hackneyed Apartheid accusation,
      
      “the Israelis treat the Palestinians like garbage”
      
      That comment is incredibly ignorant.
      
      But even if we ignore the atrocities by Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hezbollah, the Syrians, the Iranians, and the Egyptians over the years, your comment simply exposes your stunning bias.
      
      There’s a country, these days, in the Middle East, who
      is making nuclear weapons.
      
      They just HAPPEN to be the same country that has publicly proclaimed that Israel will be destroyed.
      
      Every word you speak, here, shows up your bias and prejudice and ignorance.
      
      While there’s an outside chance that you condemn both sides–my guess is you are DOING NOTHING BUT TRYING TO KEEP UP APPEARANCES BY TRYING SUDDENLY TO
      
      A-P-P-E-A-R
      
      OBJECTIVE, LEST YOU BE CAUGHT IN A PUBLIC WEAKNESS.
      
      BOTH sides are noticeably at fault.
      
      This time around, if you don’t greet this comment with silence, you will simply show up your ignorant bias, even more…..by…the….
      distorted….
      words….that…you…speak
      
      You will NOT see both sides.
      
      YOU are part of the problem.
      
      A BIG PART.
      
      YOU ARE VERY LIKELY ONLY IN A SPIN CONTROL MODE TO SAVE FACE.
      
      Your first comments were VERY TELLING.
      
      It was only AFTER you were challenged that you suddenly….began….to….
      sing….a…different…tune.
    - SuziVt
      
      Oh, and now you want to silence me? And do you honestly expect anyone to believe that you are not biased? Do you tell yourself that?
      
      What does Iran have to do with the Palestinian -Israeli conflict that we’ve been discussing?
      
      You are foolish to believe that you can read my inner thoughts. Now you’re telling me you’re clairvoyant?
      
      If you want to see genuine prejudice, please reread what you have written. It’s your way or the highway.
      
      Pardon me for expressing my opinion in a calm and respectful manner.
      
      No need to respond, I’m through with this dialogue.
    - brettearle
      
      Of course it’s my way or the highway.
      
      My way is to see both sides and to place blame on both sides.
      
      I have said that in my comments, to you, and in many other places on this thread–today and, at other times.
      
      Your biases are exposed once again:
      
      You believe that my seeing both sides are at fault, is an example of,
      
      “my way or the highway.”??
      
      Need I say more, ladies and gentlemen?
      
      Mission accomplished. /
Gordon Green

I agree with you. It’s all just so damned backwards, and sickening to see it all happen yet again, decade after decade the same violent instincts prevail, people suffering and dying for lack of imagination and accommodation on the part of political leaders. Personally, I don’t see how anything other than a one-state solution can be stable in the long run, but surely there is a better way forward than this.

1Brett1

To Obama’s war on Twinkies: you’ll have to pry my Twinkies from my cold, dead hands!

hypocracy1

It was all an socialist plot dreamed up by his wife to make us all eat healthy! Next there will be a mandate to make us buy broccoli!
- hennorama
  
  The truth about the decline of Hostess can now be told – there was a quiet underground boycott of Hostess products by The Parents Television Council – Because our Children Are Watching!®
  
  Apparently they frowned on a company that has the dubious distinction of multiple sexually-themed product names – Twinkies®, CupCakes, Ding Dongs®, Ho Ho’s®, and Sno Balls®.
  
  R.I.P. Hostess.
  
  (I assume everyone knows this post was a joke – the PTC-BCAW! had no such boycott that I know of, and if they had, they no doubt would have included “the Mexican WonderBread” – Pan Bimbo!)

hennorama

The Benghazi attack has been politicized beyond belief and the “Petraeus Affair” is only adding to the spectacle. Mr. Romney and his campaign first politicized this horrific loss of brave American lives ON SEPT. 11TH OF ALL DAYS!
�
They released a muddled and confused political attack statement, even though the fate of all American personnel was not known, and it was not yet known that Amb. Stevens was dead.
�
They had been looking for any opportunity to attack on foreign policy. Here’s the context, which critics fail to mention:
�
On May 17, 2012 in his infamous Boca Raton “47%” speech, while discussing foreign policy, and the Iranian hostage crisis and the Reagan connection, Mr. Romney said “…the American people are not concentrated at all on China, on Russia, Iran, Iraq … if something of that nature [such as the Iranian hostage crisis] presents itself, I will work to find a way to take advantage of the opportunity.” [insertion added for clarity]
�
Not to get the facts or to solve the problem, but “… to take advantage of the opportunity.”
source: http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/09/full-transcript-mitt-romney-secret-video#hostages
�
Then on Aug. 30th, Mr. Romney failed to even mention U.S. troops and the war in Afghanistan in his nomination acceptance speech. As a result, he was widely excoriated and chastised by Republicans and Democrats alike.
�
Mr. Romney got no “convention bounce” and was in fact dropping in national polls, and Pres. Obama was rising. Gallup had the race tied at 46% in late August. Just before the Benghazi attack, on Sept. 10, 2012, Gallup had it Obama 50% Romney 44%, Romney’s lowest level since late April. On Aug. 16th, Rasmussen had it as Romney 45% Obama 44%, then had it as Obama 46% Romney 44% on Sept. 8, 2012.
�
While it is of course important to investigate this attack in order to prevent future loss of American diplomats, this furor is entirely political. Try to imagine the reaction to this attack that may have occurred if this was not an election year. Republicans initially would all have condemned THE ATTACKERS and not the President. Then investigations would have proceeded, and any political criticism and fallout would have come later.
�
This was typical of the Romney campaign – fire, ready, aim – and is further reason voters rejected him, as he demonstrated a complete lack of diplomacy and Presidential judgement in this politicization of the deaths of brave Americans in Benghazi.

WorriedfortheCountry

The White House has politicized this. The election is over and it is time for the stonewalling to stop.

Joe Biden said in the VP debate that Susan Rice was repeating the stand of the intel. community. We now know (from testimony today) that this is false. Why? I suspect politics but we need the answer.

Why did the WH send Susan Rice out to the Sunday shows? Obama even admitted in his first presser that she had nothing to do with Benghazi and no knowledge of Benghazi. They should have sent out Hillary Clinton. Did Hillary refuse to go out with false talking points?

There are so many questions that need to be answered.

Since this entire sordid affair transverses State, Defense and Intelligence the call for a joint select committee to have a single investigation is the only logical next step. Otherwise, you will have four separate investigations going in circles.
- Mike_Card
  
  Ambassador Rice is a Rhodes scholar. For the demented legacy appointee McCain to call her “not very smart” is probably the ultimate in hyperbole.
  
  Do you think that endlessly repeating your uninformed diatribe against her will give it credence? You’re sad; very sad.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Deflection.
    
    I never said anything personally against Susan Rice. However, it looks like the best we can say about her is she is a ‘team player’.
  - OnPointComments
    
    WorriedfortheCountry is right; you’re deflecting. But I’ll respond anyway. I have personally known many, many people who had academic honors and perfect GPAs, many of them CPAs who also had near perfect scores on the CPA exam, and they looked perfect on paper; but when it came time to put all that knowledge to practical use, they performed miserably. Ambassador Rice’s academic achievements are laudable, but it doesn’t mean that she is competent.
    �
    I agree with the conclusion reached in this editorial: “she’s unqualified to be secretary of state or even remain as U.N. ambassador.”
    http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/111512-633682-obama-defends-susan-rice-on-benghazi.htm?p=full
- hennorama
  
  While I agree that it would be preferable to reduce the number of investigations, a joint select committee would devolve into a circus, with various minor politicians all vying to “make their bones” during any such hearings. One can only imagine how Romney’s designated Benghazi attack dog Jason Chaffetz would behave, for example. It would be a complete farce.
  
  As to your remark “Joe Biden said in the VP debate that Susan Rice was repeating the stand of the intel. community. We now know (from testimony today) that this is false.” – what little we know about today’s closed-door testimony by Gen. Petraeus disproves nothing about Amb. Rice’s remarks. All we have gotten are conflicting interpretations and recollections of politicians from both parties, and nothing definitive.
  
  Unless you know something that hasn’t been said publically, of course.
  
  http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-250_162-57551116/dems-gop-spar-over-petraeus-testimony-on-benghazi/?pageNum=1
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    So instead, we have 6 circuses that go nowhere?
    
    Anyone who makes a circus out this serious issue does so at their own peril. Your ‘concern’ is no reason to stop what is the only logical way forward.
    
    Someone edited the CIA talking points before they were given to Rice and neither Clapper or Patraeus could answer who did the editing. Are you curious who did that and what their motive was?
- Gordon Green
  
  No, this is a sordid affair disclosing the moral bankruptcy of the republican leadership, who will politicize anything. Susan Rice has nothing to do with anything close to what should be the real subject of any inquiry – that is, what exactly happened on the ground and why.
WorriedfortheCountry

The attack in Benghazi lasted for at least 7 hours.

The President repeated in his press conference that he immediately orders the military to respond to save our citizens.

We know that the military did not respond in a timely fashion.

What broke down?

Who disobeyed the President’s orders?
Did the order exist? There should be a paper trail.

Why was the backup drone unarmed. Why were no jets from the Med. carriers or Italy scrambled? Why weren’t special forces backups in Sicily scrambled as an option?

We need answers.

There may be good explanations to every question but the admins behavior in not being forthcoming raises more questions. Maybe some poor decisions were made. Fine. Get it out there.
- Mike_Card
  
  Good idea. Put those questions to President Romney–he seems to have all the answers to all the problems.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    News flash for Mike. The election is over.
    - Mike_Card
      
      You’re the one who asked for answers that Willard screamed on 9/12, yet you’re now unsatisfied. I don’t think you get satisfaction from anything. I’m finished trying to have a conversation.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      You were never trying to have a conversation.
- Mike_Card
  
  Saxbe Chambliss vetted the CIA points given to Ambassador Rice.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Source?
    
    My understanding is the ‘edited’ talking points went to both Rice and the intelligence committee. However, they were not ‘vetted’ by Chamblis. Also, per Patraeus’ testimony today they were edited by someone in the White House to remove references to Al Quaeda.
OnPointComments

Your points were all worthy of consideration in choosing between two candidates. However, the election is over, and when evaluating what happened in Benghazi, Barack Obama was the president when it happened, and he is the president now. What Mitt Romney said or what he might have done if he were president is irrelevant. President Barack Obama allowed a consulate to be attacked resulting in “this horrific loss of brave American lives ON SEPT. 11TH OF ALL DAYS!” We have yet to learn the reasons why the consulate wasn’t protected, or the reasons that help was not sent. As of now, all we know is that the truth has not been forthcoming, and we have been told a story that changes daily and has been inaccurate.
- hennorama
  
  Thank you for your response, OPC. Apologies for the delayed reply.
  
  While I would quibble with you over the word “allowed” in your comment “President Barack Obama allowed a consulate to be attacked…,” I agree that the Benghazi consulate’s security was insufficient, to say the least. It’s also reasonable to expect that security would have been increased prior to the anniversary of the 2001 Sept. 11th attacks.
  
  There has already been some public discussions as to the reasons the Benghazi consulate’s security was weak, mostly about the lack of proper fortification of the site and the buildings therein. There has also been some discussion of the security personnel details, as well as the reliance in large part on what proved to be unreliable host country forces.
  
  Of course, “the buck stops with the President” on these matters, but it would be difficult to reasonably expect any President to know all the details of the security arrangements at every US diplomatic post. That’s why I would quibble over the word “allowed,” as it implies some prior knowledge of security weaknesses and a failure to correct them.
  
  Still, the loss of lives obviates the fact that security was insufficient. We need to ensure this does not recur.
  
  My view is that the most enduring thing that will come out of this attack will be no tolerance for improper fortification of diplomatic posts, and more reliance on US personnel for diplomatic site security.

Zzzzz_zzzzz

Tom, I’m disappointed with the uncritical, brief, and superficial treatment of the situation in Gaza offered in this show by you and your guests.

Because his words are more eloquent than mine, and because he cites his sources, here I’d like to paste in an excerpt of Max Ajl’s recent thoughts on this latest round of Israeli aggression against the Palestinian people:

“In this case, that was an anti-tank rocket fired from the Palestinian
resistance at an Israeli jeep on November 10, which Israel and its
apologists in the US media described as the initial provocation in the latest round of hostilities.

We know, for three reasons, that this is a lie.

The first is because we read the news. We know that the occupying
forces encircling the Gaza Strip murdered a mentally unfit man
approaching the border fence on November 4. They called upon him to
stop, and when he did not heed their calls, they shot him down and then
prevented Palestinian medics from reaching him for hours, causing him to
die from what were thought to be treatable injuries. And we know that on November 8 Israeli forces shot at
Ahmed Younis Khader Abu Daqqa, who was playing soccer with his friends
1500 meters from an Israeli military post when a gunman put a bullet
through his abdomen. He died soon after. Ahmed was 13.

The second reason we know that this is a lie is because the assault
occurred after a 24 hour lull in the violence, induced by an
Egyptian-brokered truce. Benny Begin, a senior Israeli official, admitted
that “This round of firing appears to have ended and things must be
looked at soberly without illusions for both sides.” Israel apparently
took that opportunity and destroyed it, shattering the truce with the
November 14 assassination of senior Hamas military leader Ahmed Jubari,
continuing a long-standing Israeli pattern
of deploying targeted killings – the US and Israel’s preferred
euphemism for assassinations – to break cease-fires and ramp up the
cycle of violence at strategically opportune junctures.

The third reason any explanation involving the word “retaliation” is a
lie is because the category of Israeli “retaliation” does not exist.
The occupation is constant terror, and it is what breeds the Palestinian
violence Israeli leaders can adduce as a retroactive justification for
the policies they pursue in purported pursuit of the chimera of
“security.”

The rest can be read here: http://jacobinmag.com/2012/11/reformatting-palestine/

Next, from al-Jazeera’s Belen Fernandez:

“Israel’s ever-upbeat government spokesman Mark Regev offered the following reaction
to the Cast Lead casualty count: ‘Israel, during the military campaign,
made every possible effort to target enemy combatants only.’ One can
assume that, were Hamas to somehow kill 1,400 Israelis, most of them
civilians, in three weeks, the organisation would not be lauded for its
attentiveness to civilian life.

Regev has now resurfaced with an appeal to humanity to comprehend the current conscientious killing in Gaza, and is quoted
at the CNN website as remarking: ‘I would ask you, I’d ask any person
around the planet: What would you do if your population was targeted day
after day?’

Seeing as the ratio of Palestinian civilian fatalities to Israeli civilian fatalities during Cast Lead was approximately 400:1,
and that Israel has not in recent history been subject to an illegal
and crippling blockade, it is possible that some inhabitants of the
planet might more readily comprehend Regev’s question were it instead
posed by a Palestinian.”

The rest here: http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/11/201211168825952495.html

These two writers have a lot of company in trying to tell the truth. I’d like it if you and your guests joined them.

I hope that this situation is resolved with minimal loss of civilian life and minimal disruption of the already untenable lives of the Palestinians in Gaza, but, if it does continue, I hope that you’ll treat the ongoing story with the critical attention it deserves. No matter how unpopular it may be to tell the truth of the Gazan experience, it needs to be told. They are a people on their last legs, driven to extreme measures by desperation, and we need to hear what they are trying to say underneath the military triumphalism and ultra-nationalism of their better armed, more connected, and vastly more powerful oppressors.

WorriedfortheCountry

100 Gazan missiles on Nov. 11th 2012, killing one Israeli and injuring many more.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_rocket_attacks_on_Israel,_2012
- Zzzzz_zzzzz
  
  Thanks for your comment! I did put a lot of thought into mine, so I’m glad to see that it’s gotten at least one response—I wish it had been more substantive. I’m not sure what you mean by linking there, why you bring it up.
  
  Because after that round of rockets, a ceasefire was brokered. The whole thing could have ended there after the unfortunate tit-for-tat killing of civilians—and then Israel killed Ahmed Jabari (and his son) as they were driving during the ceasefire on November 14th. Did you read my comment? If so, you’ll remember that this kind of attack is frequently used by Israel in order to re-open hostilities and give themselves the political cover to unleash their military.
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Hello. I did find your comment to be thought provoking. At least to see the ‘other side’.
    
    I did try and research ‘balanced’ news reports on the death of the 13 year old boy. I found a CNN report (quoting Palestinian sources) that claims he was shot in the head by machine gun fire from an Israeli tank or Apache helicopter. The pictures on the CNN web page did not match the story.
    
    I find it hard to believe that the Israelis target civilians. Sorry. Perhaps he was accidentally killed by the Israelis. Maybe he was killed in some other kind of violence. It is a tragedy.
    
    However, Hamas does target civilians. They have for years. The link I posted documents the numerous cases in just 2012.
    
    There will never be peace as long as Palestinian leaders and clerics teach their children that the Israeli state must be wiped out.
    - Zzzzz_zzzzz
      
      If you found those excerpts interesting, I’d urge you to click through—there’s more to the essays I copy/pasted, & there’s the links that the authors used to make their arguments, too. I thought that this forum might auto-include the links, but it doesn’t.
      
      You say you find it hard to believe that Israelis target civilians. It sounds to me like you might even PREFER to think that. I think that would be preferable, too—it would be morally clarifying if it were true.
      
      But it’s now widely known that in the last invasion of Gaza—what Israel calls “Operation Cast Lead,” what we know here as the Gaza War of winter ’08/’09—around 1,400 Palestinians were killed, and that the vast majority of them were civilians. The IDF usually shrugs these numbers off; they say that the losses were regrettable, that they try to minimize civilian casualties, and that the casualty count would be lower if Israel’s foes (presumably Hamas operatives and other militants) did not hid within the civilian population, or if civilians did not associate with militants.
      
      But those justifications are pretty full of holes. For one thing, Israel can’t seriously say that it’s trying to minimize civilian casualties when it declares all-out war on Gaza. You can’t use tanks and airstrikes in crowded urban environments without racking up massive collateral damage. In the sense that Israel prefers to use overwhelming force (“shock & awe”) against Gaza, it very much targets civilians and civilian infrastructure. The UN Report filed in the wake of Cast Lead accused Israel of committing war crimes, and possible crimes against humanity, against the Palestinian people.
      
      Yes, Hamas does and has in the past targeted civilians. Reading the history of the Palestinian struggle for statehood and self-determination reveals an interesting evolution in the tactics they have attempted to achieve their ends, and how the desperation of their situation and the gradual exhaustion & failure of other, more peaceful options has brought them to this point. Even now, the US consistently vetoes Palestine’s appeal for international recognition of their state in the West Bank before the UN. Terrorism is a political tactic; its morality is murky & troubling, but history seems to vindicate it as a tactically sound way of drawing attention to your political issues when no one would otherwise care. Were it not for the drama of Hamas vs. Israel, the disintegration and disappearance of the Palestinian people would likely proceed without any comment from the west.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      You didn’t address the elephant in the room. How can Israel ever negotiate with Hamas while Hamas rejects Israel’s right to exist and calls for the destruction of the Jewish state? Seems like a non starter.
    - Zzzzz_zzzzz
      
      I don’t know much about the makeup of the current Israeli government (other than that it seems real, real hawkish & uninterested in the rights of the Palestinians), & I don’t know what the state of their relations with Hamas is. I don’t know who speaks for Hamas, whether their rhetoric is a tough front or recruitment tool or bargaining strategy.
      
      But I do know that Israel doesn’t seem at all practically concerned with the right of the Palestinian people to exist. The Jewish settlements on Palestinian territory are becoming permanent, and more numerous. The people of Gaza suffer in a “country” that’s a de facto refugee camp. It seems to me that both parties wish the others’ destruction; Israel just happens to be in a position where all it has to do in order to destroy Palestine is to let business proceed as usual, where Palestine has to fight back.
      
      I don’t have a solution to the larger problem, and I don’t think that it’s necessary to have one, or to pretend to have one, in order to recognize and oppose the injustice of the present situation. We all know that this impending invasion of Gaza will fall most heavily on the poor men, women, and children who live there, and that most of the dead will be Palestinian civilians—no matter how many ad-hoc rocket attacks fall on Israel.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      Hamas IS the elected Government representing Gaza.
      
      So yes, the Gazan people put themselves in an untenable situation and the suffering continues.
      
      There are evil actors supporting Hamas (Iran) who do NOT want peace. They are using the Palestinian people as pawns.
    - Zzzzz_zzzzz
      
      I know Hamas is the elected government; I don’t know how their internal leader structure works.
      
      The untenable situation I referred to was the enclosure of the Palestinian people in Gaza by the Israelis. It’s not like things were fine over there before Hamas took power.
Susan_Nicholson

I was also disappointed in the coverage and hope for a fuller more balanced discussion in future programs.
�
For example, a key missing element was that there is a context for the shooting of rockets by Hamas: namely, the ongoing Israeli blockade of Gaza.  Think about the following: �
·       Israel has put 85% of Gaza’s fishing grounds off limits. In the Oslo Accords, Israel agreed to allow Gazans to fish 20 nautical miles from the Gaza coastline. Since 2009, Israeli naval forces have prevented fishermen from going out further than 3 miles. Those who attempt to go further are shot at by Israeli forces, and are subject to confiscation of their vessels and gear. Source: UNOCHA Fact Sheet, “Five Years of Blockade: The Humanitarian Situation in the Gaza Strip, June 2012”; UNOCHA, “Gaza Strip: Areas Restricted for Palestinian Access,” July 2012.�
·       Israel has put approximately 35% of Gaza’s farmland off limits. The Israeli army has established a “no go” zone up to 1500 meters inside Gaza where Gazans cannot go for fear of being fired upon by Israeli forces. This zone happens to contain approximately 35% of Gaza’s productive farmland. Source: See UNOCHA Fact Sheet above. �
·       What goods Gaza does manage to produce despite Israeli restrictions, Gaza is prevented by Israel from exporting. In 2011 Israel allowed only one truckload of goods per day to exit Gaza, which is less than 3% the average amount of exports before Israel imposed the blockade. Source: See UNOCHA Fact Sheet above. �
·       Over 90% of the drinking water from the Gaza aquifer is unsafe. This situation results, in part, from Israeli restrictions on the fuel needed to operate water and waste water facilities, and the building materials needed to repair these facilities. Source: See OCHA Fact Sheet above; see also “The Humanitarian Impact of Gaza’s Electricity and Fuel Crisis”, OCHA Fact Sheet March 2012.
·       According to the Under-Secretary for Humanitarian Affairs and Emergency Relief Coordinator, the blockade of Gaza has had a “devastating impact on the lives and livelihood” of Gazans, and “amounts to a collective punishment of all those living in Gaza.” Source: OCHA Statement on Gaza, Occupied Palestinian Territory, June 13, 2012.
·       According to the UN, without herculean action and a lifting of Israel’s blockade Gaza will be unliveable by 2020. Source: “Gaza in 2020: A liveable place?”, Report by the United Nations Country Team in the occupied Palestinian territory, August 2012.

Until Israel is willing to rethink its blockade, any military action will just be a stop-gap measure, and a very bloody one.�
�

JeffEwener

So even David Ignatius, no flaming radical, grants that Netanyahu’s war on Gaza is essentially an election gimmick!

Long-time Israeli peace activist, Uri Avnery, puts an interesting perspective on the original Israeli assassination of Hamas military commander Ahmad Ja’abari:
“The day after the assassination, Israeli peace activist Gershon Baskin,
who had been involved in mediating [captured Israeli soldier Gilad] Shalit’s release, disclosed that he
had been in contact with Ja’abari up to the last moment. Ja’abari had
been interested in a long-term cease-fire. The Israeli authorities had
been informed.”

Maybe that was what made Ja’abari a target for death in the Netanyahu’s eyes. In true Nixon-went-to-China fashion, someone like Ja’abari could have made serious, effective moves toward a long-term Israeli-Palestinian peace. And in that event, Netanyahu would have had a very difficult time continuing to avoid it.

Gordon Green

McCain and Graham seem to just be trying to make political points. I hope Obama appoints Rice and forces the issue, so the hypocracy of these two is forced into the limelight.

StilllHere

Yes, that way we could get her to testify that she lied on behalf of Obama.
- Steve__T
  
  Most of the Republican members
  of a Senate committee investigating the terrorist attack at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi, Libya, skipped a classified briefing by administration officials on the incident Wednesday The missing lawmakers included Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who at
  the time of the top-secret briefing held a press conference in the Capitol to call for the creation of a Watergate-type special
  Congressional committee to investigate how and why the attack took place.
  Then he did not want to talk about missing the meeting. Guess he did not want to talk about how stupid he looked having a press conference in the middle of the meeting he was asking for.

Michael Bristol

“We started another round of meaningless bloodshed aimed to glorify the government during election time.”
as quoted from an ( Israeli ) demonstrator in front of minister of defense -Ehud Barak’s house, in Wednesday,
November 14th, protesting the killing of Hamas military chief – Ahmed
Jabari, and the opening of Operation “Pillar of Defense”.
Which is a quote that we will never have to hear,
here in free press North America.

WorriedfortheCountry

Did you see the video of the Isreali peace demonstrators scrambling in Tel Aviv when a missile from Gaza landed nearby and broke up their peace protest?

Oh, the irony.
- Steve__T
  
  They hit nothing but the ground
  - WorriedfortheCountry
    
    Yes, that specific missile missed.
    
    Thank God.
    - Steve__T
      
      Guess Israel has better aim they didn’t. Head line news.
      �
      Israeli Negotiator: Hamas Commander Was Assassinated Hours After Receiving Truce Deal from Israel

WorriedfortheCountry

I thought Twinkies were too big to fail.

For entertainment purposes only you can find the ingredient list here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twinkie

1Brett1

I suppose you wanted a Hostess bailout?
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  Not for Twinkies but maybe Wonder Bread.
  - hennorama
    
    If you like WonderBread, you might consider Pan Bimbo as an alternative. It’s essentially Mexican WonderBread. Grupo Bimbo also makes WonderBread in Mexico, and may even buy the WB brand now that it’s available.
    
    You can get Pan Bimbo at practically any Mexican market or bodega, or you can buy it online, here:
    
    http://www.mexgrocer.com/19102.html
    
    No comment as to the oddness of 2 major bakers having sexually-themed product names. Hostess has Twinkies®, CupCakes, Ding Dongs®, Ho Ho’s®, and Sno Balls®, and well … there’s Pan Bimbo from Grupo Bimbo.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      Ah! Caramba!
      
      Grupo Bimbo? Hmmmm. Connection to the Secret Service?
      
      Does Wonder Bread ever go stale?
      
      No but it does build strong bodies 8 ways.
      
      —
      Since Hostess owns Drakes don’t forget Devil Dogs and Funny Bones.
    - 1Brett1
      
      I thought it built strong bodies 12 ways?!?! I guess that was all part of Hostess’s cost-reduction measures?
    - hennorama
      
      Not to speak for Worried, but this may be “an age thing” – “8 ways” started on the Howdy Doody Show in the 1950s, and changed to “12 ways” in the 1960s.
    - 1Brett1
      
      Sounds like excessive waste by the company, then, always increasing their body strengthening ingredients while lowering costs. All of this was on the backs of the workers’ wages, no doubt!

TomK_in_Boston

Uh-oh. Betrayal coming?

“We had a very constructive meeting,” Boehner said at the outside. “I think it was a very constructive meeting,” Reid said. A few seconds later, Pelosi, too, declared, “It was a very constructive meeting.”Speaking last, McConnell said, “I can only echo the observations of the other leaders that it was a constructive meeting.” White House spokesman Jay Carney later released a statement saying it was a “constructive meeting” and added, “we will continue a constructive process.”

Did you hear that it was “constructive”?

I like to translate righty newspeak into English. For example, we all know that “reform” = “screw the middle class”. I’m very afraid that I’ll have to update the righty-English dictionary with “constructive” = “no tax rate increase for the rich”.

StilllHere

As much as I’d like you to be right, your record betrays you.
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  You mean my record of predicting that Lord R would double down on class warfare by picking ryan as VP, or predicting that the nasty Ken doll would lose to SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN because he was blowing his nice guy camo with his nasty, sneering campaign?
jimino

Obama is and never has been a liberal in his political views. Until at least one high level official in these negotiations says loud and clear “SOCIAL SECURITY HAS ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH OUR COUNTRY’S CURRENT DEBT OR DEFICIT” we should be afraid of the grand betrayal.
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  Current unfunded SS liability == $16T
  
  Sure, it is less than the $100+T of unfunded health care liabilities but $16T is not chump change.
  
  usdebtclock.org
  - TomK_in_Boston
    
    OOooh, the big bad debt gonna get you!
    - Davesix6
      
      If your under the age of 50, you better believe the big bad debt gonna get you!
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Yeah! Let’s save the kids by taking away their SS, medicare, public education, and in general leaving them a 3′rd world USA. They won’t have the good real things we did, but they’ll feel good that the fantasy Debt God has been appeased.
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  Exactly. Obama is a Rockefeller republican by the metrics I grew up with, and very tight with wall st. There is no liberal side in the fight, it’s the loony right vs the moderate right. Electing Lord R would have been such an escalation of the class war that I was all the way with BHO, but I have no illusions about what we got. BHO is way to the right of Eisenhower, Nixon, Ford etc and kinda like Bush Sr.

WorriedfortheCountry

Taking odds on Mayor Bloomberg placing white knight bid to save Hostess and 18K jobs.

1Brett1

Well, I just heard an investor in the western US is going to buy them out and relocate factories to Colorado and Washington state, where (considering recent legislation) there should be quite a regional business, safely putting them back in the black!
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  A rescue is always possible if the workers agree to be good sheep and stop arguing with their Entitled masters. Actually, that’s the whole point of declaring bankruptcy.
  
  “…as the company was preparing to file for bankruptcy earlier this year, the then CEO of Hostess was awarded a 300 percent raise (from approximately $750,000 to $2,550,000) and at least nine other top executives of the company received massive pay raises. One such executive received a pay increase from $500,000 to $900,000 and another received one taking his salary from $375,000 to $656,256.”
  
  Yawn – business as usual in a 3′rd world oligarchy.
  - Duras
    
    Yeah. There should be a law that cuts the golden parachutes and ties executive pay to the long-term success of the company.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Once upon a time a company would file for bankruptcy as a last resort and for legit reasons. Now it’s primarily a class warfare tactic. Once they file they can do whatever they want to the workers and the pension fund regardless of any prior commitments. The law should be changed as you say and also it should be harder to claim phony bankruptcy just to bust the workers. That’s a perfect project for SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN.
    - Duras
      
      Absolutely.
  - 1Brett1
    
    I know, and yet the dumbeat in neocon circles is, “those damn unions!”

1Brett1

All these neocons making hay out of Hostess filing for bankruptcy and restructuring…They blasted Obama for bailing out the auto industry; now they’re blasting him for NOT bailing out Hostess. What’s next for them, the “Twinkie defense”? I mean, Romney’s and Ryan’s promise to sell everybody a Twinkie at slightly inflated prices if they voted for them didn’t work! Get over it and get used to TastyCakes or Entenmann’s, for chrissakes!

WorriedfortheCountry

Yodel-ay-hee-hoo !!!!

Who wants a bailout?
JGC

Apparently, someone on ebay paid $59.99 for a box of Twinkies…
Duras

Hostess was dealing with 11 or 12 different unions, and all but one union accepted–to my mind was–a generous deal for unions in tough times for the company.

The problem is is that most of the country will pick up that only one union took Hostess down, when in reality, it was one outlier. This has been the trend in America: most unions are reasonable and do a lot of good, but there have been outliers that dominate media coverage and political speech while the wage ratios in this country are increasingly skewed towards the CEOs and executives.
- 1Brett1
  
  11 or 12? The unions involved were the Teamsters and the Bakers’ Union. The Teamsters accepted a deal, narrowly (they represented the delivery end of Hostess which is about 1/3 of the workforce). Neither the Teamsters nor the workers were too happy about the deal. The Teamsters (rightly so) had a lot of blame for the CEOs, other executives, and stockholders.
  
  I say this because this company had been run into the ground for decades. Hostess never updated any of its products or engaged in modern marketing practices, and essentially it was run like it was in the 1930s. It also recently had given its executives huge pay increases. They filed for bankruptcy back in January (they had also filed for bankruptcy back in 2004). They recently brought in a CEO who was a “restructuring” veteran and who really is there to buck the unions, help liquidate, and sell off branding and products. The previous CEO was canned (directly after they gave him a huge bonus) because he advocated a lot of innovation and updating of company practices and products to bring it into the 21st century.
  
  I agree with your larger point that often only the unreasonable union behavior gets the media coverage, but in this case Hostess killed itself. The workers and the Bakers’ Union just hastened the workers’ unemployment.
Gregg Smith

You’re going to have to cite someone, anyone, advocating the bail out of ding dongs.
- 1Brett1
  
  Hahaha….but seriously, though, Gregg, our piano-playing frenemy/prison-release success story (and if I’ve gotten that last part wrong, I certainly do apologize), you did start this enjoyable (a good mixture of humor and debate I think) discussion off yesterday with the comment about Hostess closing and 18,000 people standing in the unemployment line, etc. It was to be another illustration of your “see what the unions/liberals/entitled workforce/Obama are doing to this country? Diatribe collection. I guess your point being, “those damn unions!” in this case; or, maybe it was, “those damn entitled workers!” Or, maybe it was, “that damn socialist Obama!” I can’t remember exactly, but insert any one of these; it’ll be alright.
  
  Well, at least in the case of Hostess, it looks as though they are closing because of poor business practices in conjunction with greedy CEOs and executives, in conjunction with perfunctory management performance, in conjunction with decades of financial woes brought on by the aforementioned.
  
  So, you can take Hostess out of the, “that socialist in the White House has systematically shut down all businesses and made citizens completely dependent on government, thus playing into his diabolical hands,” column.
  - Gregg Smith
    
    Clearly you are taking the union’s side. That’s fine in the private sector if you want to be a number. Or if you want to ask for the moon without the context of merit or profit. It is not the best climate for business to succeed.
    
    But you made a claim that is bogus. No one is “ blasting him for NOT bailing out Hostess”. Who wants a bailout?
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Are you saying I did time in prison? I must be reading you wrong.
    - 1Brett1
      
      Sorry, you must be the piano-playing Gregg and NOT the prison-release-success-story Gregg. You’re still our resident frenemy, and I, for one, am damn glad to have you here. You’ve served to bring liberals together in a very cohesive sense of community.
    - 1Brett1
      
      No, I am siding against those who are saying “it’s the unions’ fault.” It IS the CEOs, other executives’ poor performances, shareholders not wanting to vote for any innovation or marketing (and voting for insane salary increases for the CEOs and executives), etc., that can be faulted in this case.
- Steve__T
  
  Look down, It’s your buddy WFC.
TomK_in_Boston

I knew I smelled the financial con game here:

“The closure of Hostess, based in Irving, Texas, means the company will lay off its 18,500 employees. In 2009, Hostess came out of bankruptcy thanks in part to private equity firm Ripplewood Holdings, which made a $130 million investment, CNBC reported Friday. Hostess filed again for bankruptcy in January, and its debt was later purchased by investment firms, including two hedge funds: Silver Point Capital and Monarch Alternative Capital, according to a CNN Money report.”

Lord Romney’s cronies in action.

andrwstrm

In regards to Israel and Palestine… Here’s something that no one in the news media (NPR included) apparently feels like discussing, the fact that Israel is in fact a colonial occupation of Palestine. To quote Noam Chomsky…

“When Israelis in occupied areas now claim that they have the right to defend themselves, they are defending themselves in the sense that any military occupier has to defend itself against the population that they’re crushing… You can’t defend yourself when you’re militarily occupying someone else’s land. That’s not defense, call it what you like, its not defense.”

Steve__T

News on WalMart they have seemed to have done some underhanded dealings in several different country’s, details to come.

hennorama

A major U.S. corporation paid bribes in foreign countries? I’m shocked, SHOCKED to find that is going on!
About as shocked as Captain Renault was about gambling at Rick’s in “Casablanca”:
Rick: How can you close me up? On what grounds?

Captain Renault: I’m shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here! [a croupier hands Renault a pile of money]

Croupier: Your winnings, sir.

Captain Renault: [sotto voce] Oh, thank you very much. Captain Renault: [aloud] Everybody out at once!
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0034583/quotes?qt=qt0429972
- Steve__T
  
  Thank you for your reply. I guess I’m a little naive, but when one of the largest chain stores in the world does this it pisses me off. The need to bribe and exploit people out of greed makes me angry, their simply is no call for it.
  
  BTW I have seen Casablanca, love the Movie, but this is real, and effecting thousands of peoples lives. I thought it was relevant. From your reply, I take it you don’t. Sorry.
  - hennorama
    
    I am sick of this illegal bribery, and angry as well, but not in the least surprised or shocked by it. What’s surprising is that we don’t hear about more of it. It may simply be they have gotten better at disguising and concealing their bribes.
    
    To see the prevalence of this bribery, simply search for “corporate bribes to foreign officials” and see how many results you get.
    
    I’m quite happy to see that there’s at least a small amount of enforcement. I hope the issue gains more media coverage, and shames the illegal actors into correcting their behavior.
    - Steve__T
      
      Thank you for your reply. I took your advice on the search and found About 11,800,000 results, not all talk about the US companies doing gribs. But still, that’s just way out there. I took time to look at several items and found a law firm ready to do business and explain how to get away with it.
      
      The FCPA and DOJ guidelines IMO are what makes it all possible.
      
      Payments
      to officials, used solely to facilitate or expedite “routine government actions,” such as
      obtaining permits or licenses, processing visas or work orders, providing
      police protection, scheduling inspections, shipping goods and mail, phone,
      power and water services, are permissible.
      
      What? further looking into the FCPA these are the reasons, and more I did not note ie freebies. Up until 2008 why few prosecutions were ever followed through. Toothless laws do no one any good. I then wondered how would you get an foreign official to say, oh yes I accepted a bribe?
      I am glad that they are cracking down, but its a little late, and they have little luck in getting a prosecution.
      Especially due to the leniency of the laws.
    - hennorama
      
      Backatcha.
      
      What this bribery demonstrates is the amoral and immoral behavior of many corporations and businesspeople in their neverending quests for profits and wealth. This is nothing new, of course. For example, The History Channel series “The Men Who Built America” essentially says that J.P. Morgan, Andrew Carnegie, and John D. Rockefeller “bought the Presidency” of William McKinley in 1896, to protect their businesses from being broken up if William Jennings Bryan had been elected. The truth of this is debatable, but certainly Morgan heavily financed the McKinley campaign.
      
      Many businesses and businesspeople seem to regard laws as merely inconvenient impediments to what they feel is their right to make profits and create wealth. This attitude becomes pervasive throughout these organizations. Let me give you an example that literally gets down to “street level.”
      
      A large corporation with many locations nationwide often uses folding signs placed on the sidewalks outside their locations. The use of such signs is illegal in many municipalities. When this gets pointed out to management, they say “Sorry, we’ll remove them,” but then they simply put the signs back out the next day. The irony is that this corporation has a Code Of Ethics that, as one would expect, requires all employees to comply with all laws and government regulations.
      
      Walmart has a “Statement of Ethics” for its employees as well, which they obviously violated.
      
      It’s all about the money. Laws and morality be damned. If youget caught, accept any penalties as just another cost of doing business, then work to change the laws and regulations to magically change your illegal behavior into legal behavior.
    - Steve__T
      
      Thanks again, all good points. I find you a wealth of information and a solid grounded thinking person and look forward to more of you incites.
    - hennorama
      
      Thanks for your king words and the tip o’ the hat – I appreciate it. Although … having gotten 2 compliments today in this forum, I suspect the world may soon start spinning off its axis…
      
      Thanks again, all kidding aside.

Duras

I’ve been harping on this for quite some time: Obama removed banks from being middlemen between students and federal loans, while Romney wanted to reinstate them. I wouldn’t have mentioned this again since the election is over, but since the recent “gifts” comment by Romney, I am compelled to say that Romney’s policy would have been a gift for his fellow bankers at the expense of millions of average Americans.

Thank you for defeating someone who considers affordable education as “gift,” and voting for someone who considers it a responsibility.

Gregg Smith

Here’s the thing, they want to kill us. The radicals are lining up to die for the Islamic Caliphate. The Muslim Brotherhood is running Egypt, here’s their creed: “Allah is our objective; the Quran is our law, the Prophet is our leader; Jihad is our way; and death for the sake of Allah is the highest of our aspirations.” Atrocities are the norm in Syria. Iran is just a smidgeon away from nukes. In the thick of the turmoil we let our Ambassador sit like a duck. He’s assassinated on the anniversary of 9/11 in a coordinated (and videotaped) terrorist attack and we are lied to. This has never been about something as small and petty as revenge. Bin Laden’s death was symbolic and did not make us safer. It doesn’t matter if we get the bastards who killed Stevens. That Hillary promised the family of a slain SEAL that they would not rest until the film maker was behind bars is nothing short of disgusting. But this administration cannot tell us the truth. Petraeus testified he knew immediately it was a terrorist attack but that was removed, on purpose, from the talking points. It’s a cover up, it’s a lie. Al Qaeda is alive and well. The jihad continues. The middle East is on fire and the world desperately needs the leadership of America.

I doubt it matters much to anyone around here given what they’ve condoned in the past.

jimino

Bush in 2003: “al-Qaeda on the ropes.”
Bush in 2003, based on the National Intelligence Estimate released that month said that “the
global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent strategy, and is becoming more diffuse.”: “Absolutely we’re winning. Al-Qaeda is on the run.”

I’m sorry, what was your point again?
- Gregg Smith
  
  No, I think the question is, what’s your point? Where is the lie? What does Bush have to do with squat? When did he call terrorist attacks “workplace violence”?
Steve__T

Condone, I don’t get you what do you think the majority here condone? Death, mayhem, lies, destruction and loss of life? I’ll tell you what I don’t condone BS post like yours.
- Gregg Smith
  
  Look at Brett condoning those who say criticism of Susan Rice is racist. Look at Hennorama condoning Obama’s Executive Order to suspend deportations when he clearly said he could not do it. Look at Jimino condoning Obama not telling us the truth about Al Qaeda.
  - 1Brett1
    
    I didn’t condone anything of the kind. You really are grabbing at the most absurd straws and going through quite a few distortions here. The criticism I was referring to was that, “she lied.”
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Then condemn it. The comment you replied to was about the racist charge.
    - 1Brett1
      
      No, Gregg, here’s your comment: “And how is the very legitimate criticism of Susan Rice being described? Why it’s racist and sexist of course. Terrific.”
      
      Here’s my reply: “And yet, congressional leaders coming out of the proceedings yesterday said criticism was not reasonably applied to her. It appears that if there was any breakdown in communication it came from intel sources withholding information. Now, by “legitimate” criticism, do you mean how she lied or Obama lied, or how he and she conspired to lie? Or do you mean that she shouldn’t have listened to the intel she was given and should have made up her own version of what she thought might have been happening?�
      I’m very confused; I keep vacillating between, “do I listen to what those in the proceedings are saying, or do I go with Gregg’s version? What to do….what to do….”Clearly, I was replying to your, “…legitimate criticism…” statement, as I said nothing about the incoming Black Caucus Chair’s (Fudge) statements, which were uncalled for and irresponsible.
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Ms. Rice is the ambassador to the UN, she is not a wallflower. Did she get played for a fool? Was she far enough removed for plausible deniability? The targets of the hate are McCain and Graham, their grillings are legitimate. They are not old white men ganging up on the poor black woman. They are not racists. Fudge is not the only one saying it.

ttajtt

food and crap one feeds the other, good vs evil, yen-yang, right-left, up-down, front-back.

Gregg Smith

And how is the very legitimate criticism of Susan Rice being described? Why it’s racist and sexist of course. Terrific.

Steve__T

It’s not racist or sexist, those are your words. It’s STUPID.
- Gregg Smith
  
  They aren’t my stupid words they are those of the incoming chair of the Congressional Black Caucus.
  
  http://cnsnews.com/news/article/congressional-black-caucus-chair-accuses-john-mccain-racism-and-sexism
  - Steve__T
    
    Doesn’t make it any less STUPID. Should have given the link first. I would not have said they were yours.
    - Gregg Smith
      
      The enemy is at war with us. Opting out will not change that. If it were not for that reality I’d be a Libertarian. There are not too many people who could have sent Rice out to lie over and over to the Nation. If it wasn’t Obama then that person lied to him too because he repeated the lie over and over. So did Hillary, she promised to put the silly movie maker behind bars. Who’s left? Or are they all lying? It matters.
    - Steve__T
      
      Thank you for READING my post NOT! nuckin fut.
1Brett1

And yet, congressional leaders coming out of the proceedings yesterday said criticism was not reasonably applied to her. It appears that if there was any breakdown in communication it came from intel sources withholding information. Now, by “legitimate” criticism, do you mean how she lied or Obama lied, or how he and she conspired to lie? Or do you mean that she shouldn’t have listened to the intel she was given and should have made up her own version of what she thought might have been happening?

I’m very confused; I keep vacillating between, “do I listen to what those in the proceedings are saying, or do I go with Gregg’s version? What to do….what to do….
- Gregg Smith
  
  The nuance of a jackhammer. Please tell me what I wrote that contradicts in any slight way anything the congressional leaders said. Please, I’m begging.
  
  Rice was sent out to lie. I guess you now agree with the same claim that sent you into a conniption a few days ago. I’m glad you finally caught up. We don’t know to what extent Rice was complicit but we know she lied. To reduce that all down to racism is sick. Do you really not get that?
  - TomK_in_Boston
    
    Were you on the warpath when the bush proxies delivered the WMD lies? Any feeling for the consequences of invading iraq vs the benzahgi affair?
    - jimino
      
      Not to mention Powell before the UN, the most blatant public manipulation of the truth to justify a war ever.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Mr Smith is probably OK with blasting CP’s performance since CP is a moderate who endorsed Obama. It’s crystal clear that the deep concern over benzahgi is political, as is the deep concern about deficits, while the righties were all on board with cheney’s “deficits don’t matter” in the W era.
      
      It would be so nice if the right showed some patriotic concern about the USA instead of obsessing over scoring political points. I suppose we can cut them some slack while they are still shellshocked, but unfortunately their behavior is just as bad when they are not.
    - Gregg Smith
      
      I don’t live in your political calculations fantasy land. Americans are dead and we are being lied to. Sorry if that doesn’t bother you.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Did it bother you when the Bush administration gave us bigger lies, thousands of deaths, and $trillions down the drain?
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Bush didn’t lie.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Hahahahaha
  - jimino
    
    Kind of like the team owner who says “X is my man” the day before X gets fired. Some things just aren’t appropriately said until a certain point in time.
  - 1Brett1
    
    Lying is when a person knows he/she is saying something untrue. Why were intel communicators lying? Or were they withholding certain information because they were still checking out the validity of that information? You and I don’t know the answers to any of these questions. It would seem, that for any of us, it would be better to hold judgement until all information has been brought out. It appears more like a combination of no hindsight to guide judgments as the first hours of the attacks were happening, and the different agencies involved were not communicating effectively with each other. Why? None of us knows. Now, if it turns out there was some sort of corruption/deliberate miscommunication, then you’ll probably say, “see, I’ve been saying this since day one!” Or, “I knew this from the beginning.” No, you don’t know this, you are only speculating. And, your speculation appears to pertain more to partisan finger-pointing measures than anything.
    - Gregg Smith
      
      I have made the same argument many times regarding WMD. It is impossible to lie without knowing you are lying.
      
      You asked: “Or were they withholding certain information because they were still checking out the validity of that information?’
      
      That’s not the point, they didn’t bother checking the validity of the silly movie, they formed talking points that ignored the CIA, the prior warnings and the videotape of the incident.
      
      I never claimed to know anything for certain but you called me drunk for posting that she was sent out to lie. She was sent out to lie. She may be completely innocent but someone sent her to lie. That person(s) is the liar. Drilling her mercilessly under oath to get to the truth is not racism as is the sick charge.
    - 1Brett1
      
      Well, W had pretty good intel that there were no WMD. He clearly stated with absolute certainty that there were WMD on more than one occasion. That’s lying.
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Then so was Hillary, Bill, Algore, Albright, Kerry, Pelosi, Reid, and the rest of them. Do I have to drag out the quotes?
    - Gregg Smith
      
      http://www.snopes.com/politics/war/wmdquotes.asp
    - Steve__T
      
      Did you read the whole article?
    - 1Brett1
      
      Were they privy to the same intel as W?
    - 1Brett1
      
      Was everyonelying? Do you know who knew what and when they knew it?
    - Gregg Smith
      
      Yes and many of the quotes came before Bush was even in office. Bush didn’t lie.
    - 1Brett1
      
      BeforeBushwasinoffice?Hahahaha
    - Gregg Smith
      
      1998
    - StilllHere
      
      You’re a liar.
WorriedfortheCountry

Notice how Obama was paternalistic when he exhibited his faux outrage on the Senator’s criticism of Rice’s presentation. I would think independent women would be outraged at Obama’s reaction.

Also, notice that Obama criticized McCain, Graham and unnamed ‘others’. Of course, the ‘others’ is Senator Kelly Ayotte. The fact that Senator Ayotte was critical of the administration ruins the continuation of Obama’s phony war on women narrative.
jimino

I think it was the “not too bright” comment from the senile guy that was so described.
hennorama

This “very legitimate criticism of Susan Rice” seems to be multiple versions of “She lied!” Right?

How is it lying if Amb. Rice was stating the exact same info contained in the CIA talking points? Was the CIA lying also? What about the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI)?

The very same CIA talking points Amb. Rice was given on Sept. 15, 2012, the day she taped her TV appearances, reportedly were also given to members of the House intelligence committee. They also had access to the ODNI info and other classified data.

All information about any possible connection between the Benghazi attack and “al Qaeda-affiliated groups” was CLASSIFIED at the time of Amb. Rice’s remarks, which members of Congress who received the classified briefings knew at the time, and still know now.

Gen. Petraus reportedly said that any mention of any possible connection was removed from the public talking points to avoid giving these groups a “heads up.”

According to reporting by Eric Schmitt of the NY Times:

[WASHINGTON -- Former CIA Director David Petraeus told lawmakers Friday that classified intelligence reports revealed that the deadly assault on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack.
But he said the Obama administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators were al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups.

Petraeus, who resigned last week after admitting to an extramarital affair, said the names of groups suspected in the attack were removed from the public explanation immediately after the assault to avoid alerting the militants that U.S. intelligence and law enforcement agencies were tracking them, lawmakers said.]

Read more here: http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/11/16/4421043/petraeus-says-details-of-libya.html#storylink=cpy

According to Tom Gjelten of NPR:

[Sen.] “Kent Conrad, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said he learned from Petraeus that Rice did not mention al-Qaida’s involvement because it hadn’t been cleared for public discussion yet.”

“She used the unclassified talking points that were signed off on by the entire intelligence community. So criticisms of her are completely unwarranted,” he said.

That view got some support Friday. A senior intelligence official said any information about an al-Qaida link was classified at that time. Rice’s Benghazi talking points, the official said, were not edited to minimize the role of extremists, diminish terrorist affiliations or play down that this was an attack.”]

Source:http://m.npr.org/news/front/165328574
- WorriedfortheCountry
  
  Why did the White House send out Susan Rice if, as the President now admits, she knows nothing about Benghazi? Where was Hillary? She was in town. Strange that NONE of the players with first hand knowledge were send out on the Sunday shows.
  
  Also, apparently Clapper and Patreaus now say the talking points were EDITED. Neither of them know who did the editing.
  
  There is more here. We just need to find out what it is.
  - hennorama
    
    Worried, thank you for your replies. I’m consolidating my responses here.
    
    No, I don’t work for the WHite House or the Oklahoma Forestry Association (OFA), although I am fond of trees and arboreal habitats.
    
    Pres. Obama did not say Amb. Rice “…knows nothing about Benghazi…”. Instead he said she “had nothing to do with Benghazi” i.e. she wasn’t responsible for the decisions made or not made. She was simply acting as a spokesperson at the request of the White House. I don’t know why she was chosen rather than someone else – that’s certainly a legitimate question – but I don’t give the choice much significance. Nor do I think the criticism of another spokesperson would have been any different than the criticism of Amb. Rice.
    
    My position on the Benghazi attack has been pretty consistent. I first expressed outrage of the politicization of the attack by Mr. Romney. I pointed out how different Benghazi was compared to the Cairo Embassy breach. I reserved judgement as to causation, especially early on when there were so many conflicting reports. After more information came to light, I summarized my view, saying:
    
    “My conclusion, based on all we know to date, is that the Benghazi attack was a combination of a spontaneous reaction to earlier events in Cairo, mixed with anger over “the video” and anger over a variety of, as you say “grievances” against the US that already existed among some of the populace, mixed together with extremists/terrorists taking advantage of both the turmoil, and the weak security at the consulate. I don’t think it was preplanned per se, but rather an opportunistic attack, a sort of ‘target of opportunity.’”
    
    I’ve consistently maintained that Amb. Rice did nothing wrong. Her remarks were virtually identical to the intelligence community’s public views at the time she made the remarks and were both cautious and nuanced. Certainly political concerns were involved, since this was the middle of a Presidential campaign.
    
    I’ve also put forth the view that many are angry at the wrong people, saying:
    
    “I feel that the justifiable righteous anger most Americans feel over the deaths of 4 brave Americans has been largely misdirected toward the Obama administration, solely for political purposes. Yes, we need to investigate and find out all the who what when where why how facts. Yes, we should hold anyone responsible for mistakes to account.
    
    But let’s be angry at the [multiple expletives deleted] people who killed our guys, not the people who are trying mightily to find out and explain what happened, and to prevent it from recurring.”
    
    As to your comments about the apparent lack of a military response during the Benghazi attack – there were multiple responses. The most immediate was the “unarmed surveillance aircraft,” as we know. Unfortunately, the options available weren’t fast enough to make any difference.
    
    The Dept. of Defense (DOD) has released a timeline of the military responses. A “senior defense official, speaking on background” about the military response said (according to Karen Parrish of the American Forces Press Service) “Unfortunately, no alternative or additional aircraft options were available within … [enough time] to be effective,” the official said. “Due to the incomplete intelligence picture on the ground, armed aircraft options were simply not feasible.”
    
    Source:http://www.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=118500
    
    Finally, as to changes made to the CIA talking points – this wouldn’t be very surprising, as they were circulated for comment prior to being finalized. Again, as I said, references to al Qaeda were classified at the time. Still, the final talking points used the more general term “extremists” which one could easily interpret as “terrorists” were one so inclined.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      ” I first expressed outrage of the politicization of the attack by Mr. Romney.”
      
      You keep bringing up that nonsense. Outrage? Really? Romney criticized the bone headed message sent out by the US embassy in Egypt. Romney criticism was so spot on that White House officials disavowed the same comment and the State Department ordered it taken down. No American should ever apologize for defending free speech.
      
      It is clear that the Obama admin and his media allies saw the Romney comment as an opportunity for a political attack of their own. The faux outrage was blown way out of proportion. It was amazing watch the media focus on a Romney tweet instead of the real tragedy that that was unfolding in Libya.
      
      “Her remarks were virtually identical to the intelligence community’s
      public views at the time she made the remarks and were both cautious and
      nuanced.”
      
      No. Not according those that attending yesterday’s hearing with Patraeus. It was clear to me at the time and now that she decided to be a team player and participate in the cover up. What is amazing is the White House talking points could have been “we are still investigating a terror attack” and this wouldn’t have been a big deal. Instead they decided to blame a movie trailer that only had 200 views on Youtube. They gave the video unwarranted free advertizing.
      
      I watched her presentation live on 4 of the 5 shows and I was in shock with what she was saying at the time. The question is why? Was a simple overreaction to the convention which celebrated the death of Al Quaeda just a week prior to the attack? I don’t know. There has to be something there. It makes no sense.
      
      Regarding the military response, I suspect you are correct. Why wasn’t the Africa Command prepared with a rapid response force? Why did it have to come from Croatia? They could have sent F16s from Italy but it isn’t clear if they could have used them. Could an F16 flyover disperse the crowd?
      
      The key part to the investigation is why was the security requests denied. Why was the ambassador in an unsecured location on Sept. 11th? Why was he in Benghazi at all?
      
      I can’t decide who I am more upset with — the corrupt administration or the corrupt media.
    - hennorama
      
      Thanks again for your response.
      
      As to Mr. Romney’s statement of Sept. 11, 2012, which was enbargoed by the campaign so as to not be released on the Sept. 11th anniversary, yet was released just after Sec. Clinton “confirmed that one of our State Department officers was killed.” Why would they embargo the statement? So they wouldn’t look like complete crass [expletives deleted] for making a political attack on the Sept. 11th anniversary. At least RNC chairtwit Priince Reebus waited until one minute after midnight on the anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attacks to tweet “Obama sympathizes with attackers in Egypt. Sad and pathetic.” He was so classy.
      
      Here’s Romney’s statement:
      
      “I’m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi. It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”
      
      Did he wait to find out who was dead? NO.
      
      Did he wait until the families of the dead and wounded were notified? NO.
      
      Did he express any support for those families? NO.
      
      Did he observe the accepted “politics ends at the water’s edge” adage? NO.
      
      Did he observe the more recent “no political attacks on Sept. 11th” practice? NO.
      
      Did his statement make factual sense? NO.
      
      Now why in the world would I be outraged?
      
      Libya was mentioned first, then Cairo, then the “death of an American consulate worker in Benghazi.” At this time, no one even knew who was dead, alive, or wounded in Benghazi, as is clear from the “consulate worker” term. He said the administrations “first response” was to “sympathathize with those who waged the attacks.”
      
      Attacks, plural, not the Cairo attack by itself.
      
      NO ONE SYMPATHIZED WITH THOSE WHO WAGED THE ATTACKS.
      
      Even if one defines the statements and Tweets from the Cairo Embassy personnel that “condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions,” and later that evening from Sec. Clinton saying “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation,” this is not sympathizing with “those who waged the attackS”. [capitalization added for emphasis]
      
      The Romney folks couldn’t even get the timeline straight. The so-called “sympathy” issued in the form of a Tweet by Cairo Embassy personnel was long BEFORE either the Cairo demonstrations and breach of the Embassy, or the horrific Benghazi attack. One could hardly characterize this as “the Obama administration’s first response” to ANYTHING, and certainly not as a response to either attack. Unless one was a fool or a politician, or both.
      
      This was no “defense of free speech” in any way, shape, or form. Please show me the part of the statement containing the word “free” or “speech” or anything remotely resembling those words either separately or in combination.
      
      This was a political attack, plain and simple, and nothing more.
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      Even if your analysis is accurate — which I don’t concede the media blew it way out of proportion.
      
      Why did the WH official disavow it and the State Dept. remove the comment if it was so innocuous?
    - hennorama
      
      I’m posting a reply to your posts “up top” due to its length and the usual DISQUS formatting issues.
    - hennorama
      
      Worried – this is Part 2 of my response.
      
      As to the closed door testimony on Friday Nov. 16, 2012 by Gen. Petraeus – there were conflicting statements made by some of the politicians in attendance. The only thing that seems certain and undisputed is that Gen. Petraeus was there, and he made some remarks on various topics. These statements probably should not be viewed as any sort of proof on either side of the argument.
      
      As to Amb. Rice’s remarks on the various Sunday newstalkshows that aired on Sept. 16, 2012 – the transcripts are available. I’m certain we’d all be interested in any of her remarks that ” blame a movie trailer that only had 200 views on Youtube.” My reading of all the transcripts shows a careful and nuanced reflection and repetition of the CIA talking points. Whenever she mentioned “the video,” it was in reference to the CAIRO events, and never as a cause of the Benghazi attack.
      
      She consistently said only that Benghazi occurred after and in reaction to the events in Cairo, and never said “the Benghazi attack was caused by ‘the video’ ” or anything similar.
      
      If you can show otherwise, please do.
      
      And as to the “movie trailer that only had 200 views on Youtube” – this video was aired on Egyptian TV and widely shared via smartphone and social media throughout northern Africa and beyond. It was condemned by the Grand Mufti of Egypt 2 days before. All prior to Cairo and Benghazi and all the other protests at US embassies and other facilities that came soon after.
      
      The US Embassy in Cairo saw all this happening and tried to quell some of the uproar, anticipating problems on the Sept. 11th anniversqary. Ergo their statement issued BEFORE any protests, demonstrations, breaches, or fatal attacks that came later. These people are diplomats after all – they’re supposed to be polite and empathize with others’ views. You know – to be diplomatic. They weren’t attacking free speech; they were defending religious liberty and criticizing an attack on the primary religion of the country they were stationed in.
      
      There are multiple sources available detailing the timeline of the Cairo and Benghazi events, and some contain add’l info:
      
      Published on Sept. 11, 2012:
      
      http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/12/world/middleeast/anger-over-film-fuels-anti-american-attacks-in-libya-and-egypt.html?pagewanted=all&_r=2&
      
      These were all published on Sept. 12, 2012:
      
      http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/09/heres-a-timeline-of-the-confusing-statements-on-libya-and-egypt/262264/
      
      http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/world/cairo-libya-attacks-timeline/
      
      http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/09/12/fox-scrambles-timeline-to-excuse-romneys-embass/189849
      
      http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/09/12/13831714-timeline-political-fallout-from-the-attack-on-diplomats-in-libya?lite
      
      http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/12/libya-attack-timeline_n_1876947.html
      
      From Sept. 13, 2012:
      
      http://swampland.time.com/2012/09/13/timeline-what-happened-in-libya-and-how-the-u-s-reacted/
    - WorriedfortheCountry
      
      You put more faith in selected leaks to the NYTs or the WaPO than direct statements by those who attended both hearings with Patraeus.
      
      I’ve heard a couple interviews with King and he seems truly perplexed by Patraeus’s testimony. I think he is a straight shooter.
      
      I thought David Ingnatius was a straight shooter too until I heard him denounce the idea of a select committee — because ‘it would be a circus’.
      
      I want to know who decided NOT to send the F16s from Italy and why.
    - Davesix6
      
      “She was simply acting as a spokesperson at the request of the White House.”
      hennorama, the point is President Obama and his handlers knew what Ambassador Rice was sent out to say was a lie.
      Therefore President Obama lied through Ambassador Rice.
      Obama didn’t have to send Rice out at all!
    - hennorama
      
      Thanks for your comment.
      Please prove your assertion “…President Obama and his handlers knew what Ambassador Rice was sent out to say was a lie.” And also please inform us as to who “his handlers” are that you refer to, and demonstrate how Pres. Obama is being “handled” by said persons or entities.
  - Gregg Smith
    
    Now we are learning Obama did know and was briefed. Rice didn’t just blame the silly video when there was little if no evidence she said there was NO evidence of a terrorist attack when there was mountains.
    
    And still they defend the indefensible. They don’t care, their man won by any means necessary.

hennorama

It’s difficult for most Americans to understand the Israeli mindset when it comes to security. The compressed geography of Israel, the Gaza Strip and other locations in the Middle East are very different from the vastness of the United States. The distances involved are quite small. Rockets need travel only 50 miles (or less) from Gaza to reach Tel Aviv and Jerusalem. Realizing this, one can more easily understand how living under such threats would be unacceptable to most Israelis.

To put this in perspective, imagine if people in Baltimore were openly hostile to the residents of Washington, DC. These cities are also less than 50 miles apart. So are Miami and Ft. Lauderdale; Los Angeles and Riverside; San Diego and Tijuana; San Francisco and San Jose … you get the idea.

This site might give you more perspective about how small this area is:

http://www.factsofisrael.com/maps2.html

Steve__T

I hope OP dose a critique, of Oliver Stones new book.
The Untold U.S. History, from the Atomic Age to Vietnam to Obama’s Drone Wars. I got a small preview It’s also going to be on Sho Time in 10 parts I think. Very eye opening and very enlightening.

I believe it would give some good discussion here. Especially the politics the lies that some of us still believe today, and things that are still taught [lies] in our schools.

I believe that if you are taught a lie its the truth, until you find out different. Santa Clause was the biggest one I was told, that’s still told today.

d_arcy_2

Obama is either stupid or disingenuous. I think we can rule out the former, which leaves the latter.He keeps repeating his “I won the election, the people must agree with me” claim in the apparent expectation that if he says it enough times it must be true. The claim – a clip of it was played again during the program – that if a person voted for him they must agree with ALL his policies would earn an F- in Philosophy 101, Logic.Anyone with a lick of sense, and not trying to push Obama’s agenda, would realize that votes for Obama came from people who agreed with MORE of his positions than they did of the other guy’s. The fact that he won re-election does NOT mean that everyone who voted Democratic supports every one of his policies or positions. There are probably “folks” out there who voted for Obama because they agreed with 10% of his policies but only 5% of Romney’s.Unfortunately, the media, including On Point and NPR, repeat every thing he says as though it came straight from the Delphic Oracle, immune to any hint of criticism.

http://hammernews.com/ hammermann

DISASTER AVERTED
How
close America came to unMitigated disaster in picking the radical class
warriors (<2%) is still incredible, and for the future could mean
when the Great Famines hit, we will go full facist. This is what a
Romney Presidency would have meant- http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/14371-focus-top-ten-coming-disasters-romneys-america-2016
. If the media had done their job and honestly explained the effects
of R&R's extreme social-net destroying plans, BO would have won by
10%, but I
fear we are basically a nation of fools, willing to believe the most
sleazy dishonest hustler in my political life- a guy whose moral
principles were written on beachsand. Any Repub with a modicum of human
political abilities would have won. Voters also retardedly returned the
Repub crazies to the House,
guaranteeing endless gridlock. Born with a bouquet of luck,
Barrack was blessed with spectacular good fortune in his meteoric rise,
brilliant strategy (which I proposed decades ago- focus on the
caucuses), animatronic spoiled rich arrogant opponents, and incompetent
2008 ones, and the 11th hour intercession of the Economic Collapse and
Hurricane Sandy. I dearly hope his offer to work together with the
RR-bot2012 was Election night bull: Romney has earned no place at any
table with his pathological lies, lunatic positions, smug self-styled
superiority, and slanderous personal attacks on Obama- he should be
shuffled off to some musty room to be decommissioned, like the 50's
model 120 mainframe he is. NEVER examined were his many secret bank
accounts (which Obama didn't hammer enough) or bizarre Mormon beliefs
(all religions are- just for believing in the "End of Days", Bush2
should have been kept light-years from the Button).Obama won
handily (+3.2 mil, 130 electors) despite
voter disenfranchisement and Repub removal of, conservatively, 1-3
million votes- because we won we probably won't pursue it, as an old
poll said. In fact Rove's election night Fox meltdown may have been
because he knew they had "disallowed" what they thought was the required
number of votes. He is an overweaningly despicable character… BUT his
protest that it was too early was absolutely correct (was 2000 that far
back?). As usual Florida was trouble- thank God they didn't pull those
stunts in Ohio (or were enjoined from them). I broke first big story about the 2000 FL TV mistakes and the 10 things Bush cheated at to win: http://hammernews.com/whoops.htmI
hope some serious legal action is taken against Rick Scott- supposedly
the most unpopular Gov in nation at 39%- for his blatant defiant voter
suppression: 6 hour lines with all that absentee and early voting?!@#$%
The puke just folded on not accepting Obamacare, so must be feeling some
Sunshine rage. YOU GOT SOME 'SPLAININ TO
DO!!While everyone is crowing about the $600 mil wasted
Crossroads/Cokeheads money dumps (things go better with $), we must
assume it DID push the meters a few points towards the rampaging
elephants- propaganda works.. and in a different scenario they could
have won, despite alienating EVERY ethnic minority and the one majority-
the roaring woman. (Instead of winning 8-9 seats maybe Dems would have taken the House! (My prediction Tues night- Dems +9 seats, win all Senate swing seats. How's that gov-proscribed rape thing working out for
you?? NH went all dyev: 2 Congresshumans, 2 Senate, Gov, and haven't
checked the statehouse, though after 300 to 100 Repub crushing in 2010,
Dems took back the NH House (4th largest in world), and almost took back
the Senate- 11 to 13 w 2 outstanding. NH has undergone most vicious
whipsawing of any state last 3 cycles (in 2008 it was R to D). Live free
or die, baby, guns + health care, plug em and patch em.YEAR OF
THE CAT: 20 women in Senate!- maybe they can acidly erode the
antedeluvian A-holes and their mindless "religiousity", and send
some to the
woodshed. After all, this "white people are now a minority" business
O'Liely was sobbing about has the potential to short-out whack-job TP
dinosaur brains.. and some may just get out rather than deal with all
those hormones… women being just below minorities in their pantheon of
disrespect and discomfort. What the hell is wrong with white men
(+Kansas+Nebraska), anyway? http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/us-news-blog/2012/nov/09/women-us-senate-senatorsKILLING VOTING RIGHTSInstead
of fixing the "Citizens United" treasonous abomination, or the
outrageous Repub disenfranchisement schemes (the REAL voter fraud), the
Supreme Republicans are going the other way- "visiting" the Justice Dept
vetting of new voting laws by the cracker South (sorry crackers- I
actually like Southerners more than Northerners) in the Voting Right
Bill. Kill that, and they've again tilted the playing field towards the
Repubs by legitimizing criminal
disenfranchisement by these Repub SOB SOS's; another extremist
"legislating from the bench" monstrousity. We need a new Justice FAST: �
IMPEACH CLARENCE   – the most unqualified hack Justice since the Gilded
Age monpolist prosti-swines.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/11/supreme-court-will-take-up-major-voting-rights-case/BETRAY US?No,
unlike the half-assed MoveOn ad campaign, he betrayed his wife, and as
Glenn Greenwald, one of the few of us A-team lib columnists to make the
Bigs at the Guardian (only 8 slots on all the media teams of USA) says:
the outrage was the full press FBI investigation of some extremely minor
harrassment of a society military bimbo with a "friend" at the FBI
(now, deservedly under investigation for sending shirtless photos- "let
he who lives in glass houses…"). The carelessness and idleness with
with the FBI ripped through these top people's lives is chilling- as
Greenwald crows,
destroying the rulers themselves of our run amok National Security
State (1.7 bil intercepted citizen communications a DAY!). This is
different long GG look at surveillence that should be required reading
in our ex-land of the free: http://www.alternet.org/rights/156170/glenn_greenwald%3A_how_america%27s_surveillance_state_breeds_conformity_and_fear/Jane
Mayer says that politics obviously played a part- it appeared 1 week
BEFORE the election, and some RW punk FBI agent took the story to WA
Repub Rep Dave Reichart, the ex-police chump who allowed the Green River
Killer to run wild for 20 years after 2 prost victims positively
identified him as an attempted killer (I questioned him on a Seatown
radio talk show- "What is the chance you've questioned the killer, but
can't see the forest for the trees [the massive volume of mindless
details in such a case]". "Very very high," said Davey), who took it to
TP wierdo Cantor, who took it to
famously anti-Dem
Director Mueller. Somehow, someway, it didn't break before the
election, though it's embarrassment potential for Obama is uncertain-
who really cares?   http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/11/12-5America
is so schizophrenic about sex, though the citizenry is way ahead of the
Government (esp Repubs), who still lumber around like Stegasaurii that
don't know how obsolete they are. In the same breath, orgs like the Boy
Scouts are excoriated for allowing molesters to operate for years (even
with their Blacklist)… and yet pilloried for trying to keep gays OUT
of the org. Make up your mind America. Similarly, gay marriage and
rights passed everywhere, even as molestation scandals burn through
what's left of the Catholic Church and a half-dozen other big orgs. I
applaud an openly gay Senator, and oppose gays in the Boy Scouts or
Catholic Church- situations tailor made for abuse. And where is this
lunatic prudery applicable to SOLDIERS -
they are commissioned to KILL PEOPLE, who cares where they are dipping
their wicks? As the exc. military journo Thomas Ricks says, "I can't
believe this is a criminal matter, when we haven't ever investigated
TORTURE! Is there now an "Office of Affairs" at the FBI?" Phd. Petraius
has been shot through the chest, shattered his pelvis in a parachuting
accident, still runs 6 miles, stabilized the shithole of Iraq, managed
the Afghan surge, befriended journos. "Too successful, too social, too
smart", says Ricks, "while incompetent time-serving Generals are NEVER
replaced. They rotate in and out every year."REEFER MADNESSThe
massive corporate-government facist group that has reaped enormous
power in the century-long suppression of a harmless euphoriant is
rallying for the counterattack against the COL, WA marijuana
legalization- (not decriminalization, this provides for recreational
sale!). Tens of millions destroyed by the pernicious lie that
this harmless weed is a "narcotic", hundreds of billions, nay trillions
spent in brutal repression of a substance everyone under 65 with an
ounce of courage has tried. DIN Hutchison, former ARK Senator and DEA
narc, is leading the charge by former narcs, Chiefs of Police,
neo-religious nuts.. to prevent the enaction of the citizens' will. It
will be very interesting to see where Barry comes down on this, wish now
he had spent a month or 2 in the Honolulu hoosgow for his youthful
puffing, cause our deporting Enforcer-in-Chiefs's AG Holder was strongly
AGAINST this dangerous rationality. After abortion passed, and
decriminalization of MJ in the 70's, I thought we were on the way to a
more decent and non-brutal society (next big ISSUE was ending
homelessness)- then RR came in with his "War on Drugs" (Americans),
Lenny Bias died with spectacularly bad timing at the height of the crack
frenzy fear, 3 strikes laws were enacted… and puff.. the USA became
the
biggest police/prison state in the world, with 5x more people, 3
million, 1% in prison/jail/parole.    MCCAIN (and GRAHAM
cracker) are determined to shamefully pump the grimy and shocking
Benghazi "scandal" for every bit of mileage they can in defeating the
nomination of Susan Rice for anything. I'm opposed since I still
harbor a reasonably hatred of a black woman neocon named RICE, and somewhat annoyed
Sue has supplanted the great diplomat: "Birthpangs of a new Middle
East", she called the mindless 2006 Israeli destruction of Lebanon. I
said BO would pay for soft-peddling that story, "Ain't no terrorism on
my watch!"

pete18

“we are basically a nation of fools, willing to believe the most sleazy dishonest hustler in my political life- a guy whose moral principles were written on beachsand.”

How true, I’m not sure how someone with such a bad record and such a dishonest campaign got re-elected.

TomK_in_Boston

Wouldn’t it be cool to see a version of “A Christmas Carol” that starts with Ebenezer Romney delivering his “47%” rant. Then a flashback to the workers laid off and companies destroyed by Bane Capital. Then he cd be visited by the ghost of Mr Bane in chains, warning him abt where he’s headed if he doesn’t change….

Unfortunately, I think the financial con man Ebenezer Romney is too far gone for redemption, but we can always hope.

Running a financial con man, a “sneering plutocrat” for president – what were they thinking?

WorriedfortheCountry

You need help.
pete18

I think a better version would have Ebenezer Obama confiscating Bob Cratchit’s wages, forcing him against his will to join his Scrooge’s Health plan, while promising that this theft will allow for the whole town to be covered, the town’s debt to get smaller and that everyone would end up paying less for their health care.

When Bob can’t find a doctor for Tiny Tim, because there aren’t enough doctors available to handle all the new patients at the restricted fees, and his health costs go up, while the town’s debt climbs, he goes to the unelected of town officials who run the health panels and asks, “Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die?” They answer, “Why yes, of course! How else can we possibly contain costs?”

“If I could work my will,” says Scrooge Obama indignantly, “every idiot who
goes about with ‘I want to hold you accountable for all your campaign promises’ on his lips should be boiled with his
own pudding.

OnPointComments

“Susan Rice’s tarnished resume”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/dana-milbank-susan-rices-tarnished-resume/2012/11/16/55ec3382-3012-11e2-a30e-5ca76eeec857_print.html

Gregg Smith

Thanks, good piece.
- TomK_in_Boston
  
  If posturing about this makes all you guys who thought lying the USA into a war with Iraq was no problem feel better about the voters seeing through the camo on your class warfare, go for it.

Davesix6

How many White House intelligence briefings did Obama miss during the campaign?
The claim by the White House is Obama gets his briefings in writing.Maybe McCain is waiting for the written version from the White House.

Davesix6

Looks like you two believe a Moderate Republican is someone who goes along with everything the Democrats want.

Seems you, like the Press, are confusing a moderate with a RINO.

Gregg Smith

Stephan Hayes asks some good questions. President Obama said: “And we’re after an election now. I think it is important for us to find out exactly what happened in Benghazi, and I’m happy to cooperate in any ways that Congress wants.”

Can we dispense with the notion this was not abut politics? Why mention the election, it was just as important, if not mores, than before the election.

He also said: “ “For them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi…”

Why would the administration choose as their spokesperson someone who had no knowledge of the matter?

http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/susan-rice-s-talking-points_663527.html

jimino

Obama once again shows his naivete about the “loyal” opposition. For them, EVERYTHING is political and about gaining and exercising power on behalf of the wealthy zealots that finance it. And except for your role as a tool, that includes you and the other so-called conservatives who comment on this site (assuming none of them are shills for one of those wealthy zealots). Elections are irrelevant to someone who thinks it is truly God’s will that they be in charge.
- Gregg Smith
  
  Your anger in misplaced.
- pete18
  
  Damn, Jimino sees through everything. I thought for sure no one would discover the fact that my next door billionaire plutocrat had been sending me bags of cash to post all sorts of things I don’t really believe on this site so he could remain in control.
  
  Wait, I see a line of Democrats with halos over their heads walking down the street handing out bags of other people’s cash, maybe they will help me!
  - jimino
    
    Oh I don’t doubt you believe them. Maybe real intelligence (as opposed to the curve represented by IQ testing) is distributed like assets in our country (a distribution you probably see as an appropriate reflection of how things should be as dictated by the respected market), where a small number have a lot, most have very little, and the average is not really representative of anything of much importance. That would be perfectly acceptable and understandable in the “marketplace of ideas” wouldn’t it?
    - pete18
      
      I’m not sure what your point is except that you have a high regard for your own opinion, which you’ve decided must have something to do with your “real” intelligence (as opposed to any opinion that might disagree with you). That certainly sounds like a flexible and confident mind to me.
TomK_in_Boston

Don’t forget the #1 righty plutocrat lie, “If you cut my taxes and deregulate my corporations, it will be good for you.”

Gregg Smith

The Democrats are champions of the tactic of repeating a lie over and over until it’s believed. The examples are legion: Bush lied about WMD, the tax cut’s weren’t paid for, the “stimulus” worked, the economy is rebounding, etc. This time it was the silly video. And it almost worked. For weeks around here we had commenters swearing it was the silly video and being completely condescending to any mention otherwise. Somewhere along the line they morphed (after the debate) to saying Obama told us on day one it was a terrorist attack. The lie was repeated. Now they are reluctantly having to accept that Susan Rice was sent out to lie… but they defend that too.

“Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive” is another one. Technically it’s true but the clear implication is a lie. Bin Laden is dead but Al Qaeda is alive as is the global jihad. GM is being propped up and has no viable business plan. The taxpayer is out tens of billions of dollars.

hennorama

Worried – thank you for your responses. I respect your views, and
will comment on your posts a bit later in this reply. I’m posting this “up top” due to its length and the usual DISQUS formatting issues.
All the way back in mid-September, I positted an alternative scenario regarding Mr. Romney’s muddled and confused statement of Sept. 11, 2012. I tried to imagine how the Romney campaign might have acted if the Cairo and Benghazi events had not happened on Sept. 11th.
Given the nature of the instant statement and counter-statements
during political campaigns, the Romney camp was restricted in their
response to the incidents, due to the widely accepted “no political
attacks on 9/11.” Remember, they were LOOKING for a foreign policy issue to take advantage of. Here’s what I said 3 days after the Benghazi attack and Cairo Embassy incidents:
[When they read the stuff out of the Cairo Embassy, they likely would have issued a statement right away, probably something like "Obama apologizes for America again!"
When the Cairo Embassy was later breached and the flag was pulled down and replaced, they would have issued another more strident statement, probably something like "I'm outraged over this attack on US soil and the American flag, Obama is weak, see what you get for apologizing for American values ..." etc.
Then when the US Consulate in Benghazi, Libya was attacked and it
became clear that Americans were killed and wounded, they probably would have at the very least considered waiting until casualties were confirmed and all US personnel accounted for, relatives had been notified and Pres. Obama had weighed in.
Instead, they were restrained by the fact that it was Sept. 11th, and the internal pressure inside the campaign built and built and built as events unfolded, finally bursting out in a very messy, confused and controversial statement.]
I doubt there would as much controversy had a scenario such as this played out. Mr. Romney would have made the usual sort of statement post-Benghazi, similar to Rep. John Boehner’s statement, which was:
“We mourn for the families of our countrymen in Benghazi, and condemn this horrific attack. Eleven years after September 11, this is a jolting reminder that freedom remains under siege by forces around the globe who relish violence over free expression, and terror over democracy — and that America and free people everywhere must remain vigilant in defense of our liberties.”
Source:http://boehner.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=308060
Of course, had there been no loss of American lives in Benghazi, we
very likely wouldn’t even be discussing this now. “The video” would
go where it belongs – into the dustbin of history. The protests and
demonstrations and even the Cairo Embassy breach would have gotten some attention and coverage, but since these are not exactly rare occurences, they would likely have mostly faded away by now.

The Petraeus affair would also be mostly a yawner, as there appears to be no national security problems.
Instead, we have a quite messy and unfortunate situation. Rather than a country united against those who attacked and killed our people, we have internal bickering, finger-pointing, political
grandstanding, second-guessing, and 20/20 hindsight.
Now to your posts.
As to the Cairo Embassy tweets/statements being “disavowed” and
removed – there was reporting at the time that the initial statements sent by the Embassy personnel were sent to higher-ups for approval prior to their release, and that approval was not given. The statements were made anyway. I don’t know why, but it may simply have been a case of those “on the ground” overriding the judgement of those in Washington, and using their own judgement and initiative. The Cairo personnel were most familiar with the situation, after all, and were trying to defuse a potentially ugly situation.
I can only speculate that the State Dept. wanted only the “official
line” to be presented to the public, especially given the controversy
and the loss of life in Benghazi. Politics no doubt played a role as
well.
Politico broke the story of the “disavowal”
here:http://www.politico.com/politico44/2012/09/white-house-disavows-cairo-apology-135247.html
As to the closed-door Petraeus testimony – we are likely to continue
to see conflicting statements on this, due to the politics. The Sunday talk shows will probably only add fuel to the fire.
As to not sending jets into an urban environment without being able to clearly discern who’s who on the ground – well that seems self-evident. Would the outcome have been different? Who knows. The assault on the consulate was already over by the time any air response could have arrived. Then one has the calculation of risking further bloodshed AND potential disaster. Imagine, for example, if an attacker had managed a lucky RPG shot on a low-flying jet or helicopter and had blown it out of the sky.
Thanks again for your responses.

OnPointComments

Embrace brevity.
�
Is it important that the head of the CIA be someone who demonstrates sound judgment? Should the country expect sound judgment only in professional matters, or should we expect this person to also demonstrate sound judgment in his personal life?
�
Many of the questions about Benghazi could be ameliorated by a clear, unambiguous statement from the President stating what he knew, when he knew it, who he gave orders to, when those orders were given, and what those orders were. Stating the facts that he personally knows to be true, followed by a question and answer session, would not hinder an investigation.
�
It is just as likely that the Administration was trying to spin the Benghazi story to make sure it wasn’t perceived as a foreign policy failure as it is that the Republicans were looking for a foreign policy failure to take advantage of.
- hennorama
  
  Your brevity point is well taken. In that spirit:
  
  Yes.
  
  Sound judgement in all matters is required, but there is also some leeway as to personal behavior among consenting adults. A brief tryst can be overlooked, for example.
  
  I agree but this is unlikely.
  
  As I stated, politics were involved.
  - OnPointComments
    
    Your comments are always insightful, and occasionally sway me.
    - hennorama
      
      I appreciate your kind words, and am proud of my occasional minor successes.

OnPointComments

My main wish on November 6th was for the presidential election, but my secondary wish was that the voters of Massachusetts would show some sense and not elect lunatic limousine liberal Elizabeth “Fauxcahontas” Warren to the Senate. I’ve tried muting the sound every time she appears on television, but that still leaves the picture of this intense wild-eyed daft harpy silently ranting about one thing or the other. It’s easy to imagine the men in white coats coming up behind her, forcing her arms into the straight jacket, and hauling her away, but that likely won’t happen, so now we’re forced to endure six years of her nonsensical blather, perhaps even on the banking committee.
�
http://www.businessinsider.com/elizabeth-warren-banking-committee-2012-11
�
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/danieldoherty/2012/11/17/warren_those_darn_senate_republicans_wont_stop_filibustering_and_im_going_to_washington_to_stop_them

TomK_in_Boston

Repeat after me:

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN

SENATOR ELIZABETH WARREN

Hahaha. God still loves the USA.

Gregg Smith

It’s hilarious seeing the libs contort themselves to defend Rice. Through the years I have insisted Bush did not lie about WMD. It is impossible to lie without knowing you are lying. Lib after lib after lib has refused to say the Democrats lied about WMD but the quotes are numerous. If Bush lied they lied. Never once has a “Bush lied” accuser admitted so. Now all of the sudden that same logic is being defended regarding Rice.

TomK_in_Boston

Actually the only reason I’m talking about this at all is that you righties won’t talk about anything else. If you’re not gonna shut up about it I’m gonna at least point out your hypocrisy. Geez, it’s like listening to “nasty Ken doll” scott brown’s campaign and going “Oh No, not the native American thing again” – worked out well for him, huh? If it makes you feel better, enjoy.

How about Bush clearin’ brush in crawford over the summer when the alarm bells were going off? Remember “Bin Laden determined to strike in USA”. I bet you’re fine with that, huh? ROTFL.
- Gregg Smith
  
  I can see why you want to talk about Bush but not how my breathtaking hypocrisy pertains. I knew a drug counselor who spent his weekends locked in his house with a Great Dane shooting coke and hiding in the closet. He was an awesome counselor and spectacular hypocrite. Lives were put back on track.
  
  Are you a “truther”?
  - TomK_in_Boston
    
    Wrong. I want to talk about the economy and fighting back against 30 years of class warfare. You want to talk about benghazi and find fault because it helps take your mind off the election. Like I said, if you persist, you’re really living in the proverbial glass house if you were on board with the bush incompetence and lying and their immensely greater fallout for the USA.
    - pete18
      
      As much as you seem to dislike all Republicans, if we are just talking economic policy, what specific parts of this general premise, presented in a speech by Ronald Reagan, do you disagree with?
      
      “If government is to retain the confidence of
      the people, it must not spend more than can be justified on grounds of
      national need or spent with maximum efficiency. And I shall say more on this
      in a moment.
      
      The final and best means of strengthening demand among
      consumers and business is to reduce the burden on private income and the
      deterrents to private initiative which are imposed by our present tax
      system — and this administration pledged itself last summer to an
      across-the-board, top-to-bottom cut in personal and corporate income
      taxes to be enacted and become effective in 1983.”
    - jimino
      
      That’s the fairy tale script and version.
      
      In the real world, the tax cuts did not help the economy recover, resulted in unprecedented federal debt and deficit, and were rolled back by later multiple tax increases culminating tin the Tax Reform Act of 1986, which helped make Social Security the fully funded program it is today and will be for the next 30 years.
      
      Why do you insist on treating a fable as the truth?
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      Because economics is a religion, not a science, to the right.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      I do not dislike all republicans. Eisenhower was my favorite post-WW president and I voted for Weld. I dislike the current looney right. Ike would be a RINO today.
      
      I have no problem with RRs first para above, tho it’s a bit like saying you’re in favor of highway safety.
      
      The second para is meaningless today. It makes some sense in a high tax environment, so RR was not totally off base. However after 30 years of tax cutting and soaring inequality, with taxes on the rich at or near post-1929 lows and the 1% richer than at any time since 1929, pointing the finger at high taxes is absurd.
      
      Here’s a thought – it’s often good to look at the results of a policy. How has the middle class done since the tax cutting began?
    - StilllHere
      
      Class warfare, truly pathetic, it doesn’t exist.
      
      You want to make up facts and fantasize over causal correlations.
      
      You’re wasting everyone’s time.
    - TomK_in_Boston
      
      But you have nothing else to do, so what’s the problem? A little less TV time?
      
      Got it, the decline of the middle class and the gigantic redistribution of wealth to the top since 1980 has nothing to do with our sharp turn to the right. Sorta like how having the highest health care costs and shortest lives in the developed world has nothing to do with letting the private sector run our health care.

TomK_in_Boston

“So I wonder why we are starting this new Congress with a protracted debate about a foregone conclusion… . I can only conclude we are doing this for no other reason than lingering bitterness at the outcome of the elections… . We all have varying policy views, but the President, in my view, has a clear right to put in place the team he believed would serve him best.”

—Sen John McCain, defending the appointment of the other Ms Rice despite the iraq WMD fiasco.

Guests

From Tom’s Reading List