President Obama Defends Libya Response on ‘Daily Show’

Since the Benghazi US Embassy terrorist attack, I’m wondering how the US State Department has increased the security at our embassies. There are about 270 US Embassies throughout the world. That probably includes 30 or more embassies in the Middle East and Africa where terrorists are most likely to strike. Did they add more security? If so, how many and how much does this cost to secure these places 24/7/365?
Note: It takes 61,320 man-hours (24 X 7 X 365) to add just one extra security person, around the clock per year, at just one embassy.
How many troops would you have sent in, to better secure all the embassies 24/7, if you were President? 5? 10? 20? Where would they be housed? The logistics and costs of adding even a few security personnel 24/7 are terrifically difficult and expensive.
In my opinion, it was probably a good thing they didn’t have more security personnel in Libya. They may have all been killed. A better solution may be to have a plan to get the embassy personnel out of the area (or into a safe room), if they feel threatened. In Libya, it was apparent that the terrorists had too much firepower for even an increased security team. They might have all been slaughtered! And who’s to say Al Qaeda wouldn’t have sent in 200 terrorists with grenade launchers, if the security had been increased. This was a surprise hideous attack, just like 9/11. Even the Pentagon was not secure from that terrorist attack.
Isn’t the host country supposed to provide some security for foreign embassies? I’ve been to DC and all the foreign embassies look very vulnerable there. I’ll bet it wouldn’t take long for US troops to secure a foreign embassy in DC. In my opinion, our US embassies should have a safe room that can be secured and livable for a minimum of 3-5 days against a terrorist attack. That would give the US, or host country, time to deploy troops to secure the area and rescue the embassy personnel and their security team. We can’t expect a small security team to be able to protect an embassy against a well-planned and heavily armed surprise terrorist attack like that in Benghazi.
I’m wondering how Mitt Romney would have directed the State Department to increase the security in these areas? How would he have acted as President, after the Benghazi attack? Would he have sent in military troops?
President Obama was heavily criticized for not jumping to judgment, and calling the Benghazi attack a terrorist attack, before he had a complete report from the State Department personnel including the ambassadors in the area. What was the rush for judgment? So what if it took two weeks to finally determine who instigated the attack. So what that the State department was wrong in their initial reports that the cause of the attacks was a video as was widely reported by the media. Al Qaeda tricked the media and used them to report the video as the cause of the attacks. Now that we know that this was an Al Qaeda planned attack, what do we do now? I’m wondering what Mitt Romney would do at this point? Start another war like we did in Iraq and Afghanistan? That cost thousands of lives and trillions of dollars. Or do we take the time to investigate the attacks and track down those that actually instigated and carried out the attacks, like we did with Osama Bin Laden. The terrorists disappeared throughout Libya and beyond within hours after the Benghazi attack. Numerous other attacks occurred at other embassies throughout the region that appeared to be unorganized spontaneous attacks, intentionally inflamed by Al Qaeda by blaming the video.
Let the intelligence community do their work to determine the main instigators of these attacks and bring them to justice. Those involved will usually reveal themselves by bragging to others that they were the ones who killed the Americans in Benghazi.

MOUNTAINLOVER: “President Obama is losing his presidency over this issue because he isn’t dealing with it the way it should be dealt with…” – - – Okay, EXACTLY what should he do or have done differently?

If he wasn’t confused, why did he apologize for some stupid film causing the attack by demonstators before an invesigation was done. That is what he could have done differently for once instead of always apologizing for some persieved wrong on our part whenever our people are killed.

If he wasn’t confused, why did he apologize for some stupid film

Posted by: cece | October 19, 2012, 1:19 am 1:19 am

Please provide the quote that shows him apologizing for the film. Complete quote and date please.

“We weren’t confused about the fact that four Americans had been killed,” Obama told Jon Stewart in a taped appearance on Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show,” according to pool reports. “I wasn’t confused about the fact that we needed to ramp up diplomatic security around the world right after it happened. I wasn’t confused about the fact that we had to investigate exactly what happened so it gets fixed. And I wasn’t confused about the fact that we were going to hunt down whoever did it and bring them to justice.”

“Every piece of information that we get, as we got it, we laid it out to the American people,” Obama said. “The picture eventually gets fully filled in.”

Excellent dodge there, King Putt. I think the thing that you are confused about is telling the truth. There’s too many contradictions. You’ve made a big mess here.

Why should we believe that Obama is going to do what he says? If he is re-elected, what is his motivation to follow through with his commitments on anything? Who’s going to hold him accountable? He seems content to look out for # 1 and the rest of us be flushed. It’s not like he seems concerned about approval ratings and if re-elected he can’t run for 3rd term. So, why should we afford him another shot at trashing what’s left of our country? He hasn’t earned it, and he never did deserve it. I don’t trust him.

“Here is what I will say, if four Americans get killed it is not optimal,” Obama said,—-ABC neglects to add in that quote from Obama to Stewart—-Not optimal???? Holy friggin cow…..

Shut it SLIM. Find your own quotes.

Posted by: brought 2 u by the letter “o” and 16 trillion | October 19, 2012, 2:10 am 2:10 am

You’re the one who called the President a liar on Libya – and now you’re the one unable to provide a single quote showing him lying.

So much for YOUR integrity.

No SLIM, I’m calling him a liar in general. And no, I don’t have to prove it to you. Besides, it’s not like you’re going to listen anyway. I could have better conversation with the wall.

Like or not, SLIM or JIM or Dave or whatever other name you use on here, I get to have my own opinion. It’s my right to have it and share it. It doesn’t require proof.

I think that being able to accept that other people have ideas and opinions that are different than yours, sometimes significantly, is one of the biggest challenges to us as a human beings.

You don’t have to like what anyone else says. Just don’t be a jerk about it.

“Okay, I get it. You can’t produce any evidence the President told any lies on the Libyan situation. Thanks.”

Obama would never bother to dirty his hands like that. He’d rather lie by proxy. Both UN Ambassador Susan Rice and White House spokesman Jay Carney insisted that what happened in Benghazi was not a premeditated attack and that it was a spontaneous reaction to a crude film few people had ever heard of. In his remarks the morning after the attack, the president said “Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None.” which also reinforces the idea the administration was pushing about the film being at the center of all of this.

It would be much more useful, however, to discuss what the U.S. is doing in Libya. How curious that our government would want to involve itself in toppling the regime of a country with no foreign debt, significant oil reserves and considerable public infrastructure- including the largest water delivery system in the world! What about questions like “Is Libya better off now than it was under Qaddafi?” In less than a year they have gone from having one of the highest standards of living in all Africa (with less income inequality than the US!) and some of the highest female literacy & participation in the workforce to one that is controlled by Islamists and local warlords and plagued by kidnappings, extrajudicial killings and racially motivated violence. Qaddafi was certainly no choir boy but by every objective measure we have made it worse. But I suppose we’re supposed to be ignoring all that and view the attacks as if they were taking place in a vacuum!

Posted by: Giancarlo Bruno | October 19, 2012, 3:07 am 3:07 am

My understanding of the air attacks in Libya was that the United Nations and NATO had determined from their intelligence that Qaddafi had threatened to and was actually about to slaughter large numbers of people who were rising up against his dictatorship and decided to intervene to prevent this.

The U.N. came onside and NATO. Canada, France, Britain, Italy etc. all came onside with military support.

Why they would intervene in Libya and not Syria seems to have to do with larger global politics. Nobody (including Russia and China) came to Qaddafi’s defense. On the other hand, Russia and China both came on side with the dictator in Syria.

I think the decision was made not to risk a larger global conflict.

Most credible media outlets throughout the world would disagree with the attribution of the attacks to anger over The Innocence of Muslims.

As for the foreign policy of the United States and the president himself, they deserve to be denigrated and we should so frequently! Anyone as powerful as he is should be taken to task when they lie to further their electoral prospects or agenda- particularly when the lies are so clumsy and half-baked as they are here!

Posted by: Giancarlo Bruno | October 19, 2012, 3:32 am 3:32 am

First of all, I didn’t insinuate that you’re a Republican. I attacked the Republican position and Romney’s attempts to play up the issue for political gain.

“Most credible media outlets throughout the world would disagree with the attribution of the attacks to anger over The Innocence of Muslims.” They have not.

Because the NY Times has made mistakes in the past does not mean their on-the-ground reporting is wrong on this attack.

I see a lot of people alluding to the lies of the administration without having any proof the administration lied, nor being able to clearly identify and prove any lie – and in fact people are blabbing away NOT knowing the full details of what happened or the motivation.

A lot of people are jumping to conclusions – most of them in an attempt to get political gain.

Please read RASCAL MINIHAN’S comment above – it’s the only note worthy comment on the site that appears well thought out and actually insightful!!!!!

Hey People: Not one of you on this blog really knows what happened so justg be quiet. Let them investigate it. Really, the host country should provide the bulk of security or we should get the heck out of their country. Quit trying to help the lying, flip-flopping, bullying Romney!

“Hey People: Not one of you on this blog really knows what happened so justg be quiet. Let them investigate it. Really, the host country should provide the bulk of security or we should get the heck out of their country. Quit trying to help the lying, flip-flopping, bullying Romney!”———–Yes everyone should stop criticizing the poor president. The fact is that the were on the phone with the embassy and know exactly what was going on. You think a spontaneous crowd just came along with some bottles like they claimed? The came extremely armed and organized. You are a fool or a complete oabam robot to think they didn’t know what was going on. Are all obamatrons such idiots!

Romney, Ryan, the House Republicans, and others in the TGOP are trying to turn an issue of how to prevent a reoccurrence of the Benghazi tragedy into a witch hunt and an attack on President Obama, pure and simple. The whole issue has now become a concerted effort by the TGOP to score political points by politicizing this tragedy.

To take this tragedy and turn it into an attack on the President and a negative narrative about President Obama’s foreign policy is absurd. When compared to the 1983 terrorist bombing of U.S. Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon which killed 241 Marines when Ronald Reagan was president, the Benghazi tragedy is a substantially less egregious oversight in discovering and recognizing a terrorist threat. The Democrats didn’t use the Beirut disaster as an indictment of Reagan or his foreign policy at that time and I’ll bet other Americans didn’t either.

The murder of the U.S. Ambassador and three other Americans is a terrible tragedy and the perpetrators must be brought to justice. The lessons learned from the Benghazi tragedy should be put to use to prevent a similar tragedy in the future. The U.S. State Department is conducting an investigation headed by Thomas Pickering and former Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Admiral Mullens. This is the investigation which will give us the answers to prevent this type of tragedy in the future, not the fully politicized rants of partisans.

Let’s please put this Benghazi act of terror in a rational perspective, free of politics. The U.S. has had at least 10,000 citizens(combatant & civilians) killed in terror attacks and in the ‘war on terror’ in the past eleven years. The battle against terror will continue and, unfortunately, it is likely more tragedy will occur as the battle continues.

“nto a witch hunt and an attack on President Obama, pure and simple. The whole issue has now become a concerted effort by the TGOP to score political points by politicizing this tragedy.”
——–False.The obama administration claimed the cause was a youtube video and that the attack was spontaneous. This was refuted by the libyans themselves, even while the oabama administration continued to say it was a spontaneous attack. They would still be saying that till this very day.

“The Democrats didn’t use the Beirut disaster as an indictment of Reagan or his foreign policy at that time and I’ll bet other Americans didn’t either.”
————–False. Reagan was criticized by the dems, by the phrase “cut and run” and then accused of invading granada to save face by the democrats.

“Let’s please put this Benghazi act of terror in a rational perspective, free of politics. The U.S. has had at least 10,000 citizens(combatant & civilians) killed in terror attacks and in the ‘war on terror’ in the past eleven years. The battle against terror will continue and, unfortunately, it is likely more tragedy will occur as the battle continues.”
———– Well then you again agree with oabam, ” If four Americans get killed, it’s not OPTIMAL’: so says Obama’

“A spontaneous attack over an anti-Muslim video trailer…” Repeated over and over and over to the American people. Did Obama go there???

For weeks after the attack President Obama claimed it was the result of some obscure YouTube video. Ambassador Susan Rice went to FIVE Sunday talk shows and said the violence was sparked by a video that most people have never heart about, Secretary of State Clinton joined the chorus. All the evidence pointed to a coordinated terrorist attack but it didn’t fit the President’s narrative which is America must be at FAULT. The evidence is out and now the President has to backpeddle. So rather than taking the situation seriously and being frank with the Ameircan people, he goes to Jon Stewart on COMEDY CENTRAL and says ‘WHEN FOUR AMERICANS GET KILLED, IT’S NOT OPTIMAL.” Huh…

Lady Lex obviously you hear it, you sure commented on it!

Patrick “For weeks after the attack President Obama claimed it was the result of some obscure YouTube video. Ambassador Susan Rice went to FIVE Sunday talk shows and said the violence was sparked by a video that most people have never heart about, Secretary of State Clinton joined the chorus. All the evidence pointed to a coordinated terrorist attack but it didn’t fit the President’s narrative which is America must be at FAULT. The evidence is out and now the President has to backpeddle. So rather than taking the situation seriously and being frank with the Ameircan people, he goes to Jon Stewart on COMEDY CENTRAL and says ‘WHEN FOUR AMERICANS GET KILLED, IT’S NOT OPTIMAL.” Huh…”———–Exactly and the all the left wing odumbotrons around here can do is whine and say lets not talk about it! Democrats are more conerned about big bird!

“If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal,” Obama said…Wow. Even if he was following Stewart’s use of the word “optimal”, that sounds very self-absorbed and very cold-hearted. Much like “bumps in the road”, as Obama unwisely said before. Shows that Obama sees these tragic and important events not as deeply affecting others, but merely as inconveniences to him and his perpetual campaigning. Quite damaging. Then there is the more important fact of Obama’s ongoing lying and lame coverup on Libya.

I do wish that Obama could dance his way out of this dreary mess. But i guess he can’t, and he may have to eventually tell the truth and come clean.

Posted by: lexingtonlady | October 19, 2012, 7:51 am 7:51 am ………………………. ABC this is the immature republican name stealing troll at it again. Because he has no life.

no one person can make a accurate decision what happened in libya untill all the facts are in and processed. the president could have sent in troops,yes the last president sent in troops in iraq to find all the weapons of mass destruction and what did they find???it just got a few thousand of our servicemen and women killed and maimed..thats what happens when you jump too quick what romney fails to do is say exactly what he would have done under the same circumstances,he never would because he cant even explain his tax plans

Obama’s pathetic attempts to explain away his administration’s reaction to the Benghazi terrorist attack are beyond belief, and it’s frightening that the government – of ANY administration – would try to mislead the public concerning any issue, especially security, in order to preserve themselves or their agenda. The fact that much of the media was/is complicit in its support of Obama, or any person/party is equally scarey. And, adoring Obama supporters that bury their heads in the sand and forgive or explain away this incompetency and cover-up is downright terrifying still.

For those waiting for the facts here’s an interesting one, we have defense satellites that see this kind of crap in real time. The whole story about the video was pure spin !!!

OBAMA—–THERE IS NOTHING TO FIX OTHER THAN YOUR STILL LYING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE AND YOUR INCOMPETENCE!!! IF YOU HAD LISTENED TO MR STEVENS REQUESTS FOR MORE SECURITY AND BOTHERED TO GO TO YOUR DAILY INTELLIGENCE BRIEFING THEN MR STEVENS COULD HAVE BEEN ALIVE TODAY!!! THE SYSTEM IS NOT THE PROBLEM–YOU ARE!!

transparent as hell, FIRE HIM

Obama is not presidential at all. He’s just a “celebrity” fad, whose time has passed.

Reply to Dave | October 19, 2012, 1:47 am 1:47 am
————————————————————–
I see you conveniently left out Clinton…Is it because under Clinton we had more embassy personnel killed than any other President? because he is a Democrat? It seems you’re cherry picking facts and losing credibility. I’ve been dealing with this administration for the last 4 years and its been a horrible time…no clear guidance, no leadership, mixed messages, no real commitment, non-stop politics since day one…We need an administration to place the AMERICAN PEOPLE AND AMERICAN INTEREST FIRST!! Obama has failed, he had my vote in 08′ but its ROMNEY in 2012!

During the debate this question was asked:
This question actually comes from a brain trust of my friends at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola yesterday. We were sitting around talking about Libya, and we were reading and became aware of reports that the State Department refused extra security for our embassy in Benghazi, Libya, prior to the attacks that killed four Americans. Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?
Why has Obama as promising the most transparent presidency in history refused to answer this question? I have to assume when he boldly claimed full responsibility it was his fault.

Wow, you know Obama is in trouble when even John Stewart is pressing him.

Obama is going to “FIX IT”—–Obama the system is not the problem— YOU ARE!!!

All this anger at Obama and quite possibly it’s deserved. But where was all this anger for GW after 9-11. They knew the attack was coming and did NOTHING to stop it. 3000 and counting lives were lost on American soil. Bush/Cheney have not been held accountable for that day. After the attack they decided to sell us on how safe we were going to be under their care and we re-elected them. Fox guarding the hen house. It seems to me that lots of people are conveniently forgetting what “their guy” has done.

Obama still denies the truth, that we all KNOW!

The administration denied the embassy any additional security, after 2 previous attacks, and that is why Americans died.

The administration then lied about the cause, to cover up their own role, because of the election.

Clearly, Obama will tell us ANYTHING, including bare faced lies, to win reelection he DOES NOT DESERVE!

Look, the President told us what he knew. The State dept., CIA and Congress all dropped the ball; the President had nothing to do with this issue. We all need to move on. The President’s agenda far outweighs any of this nonsense over a trivial matter. These four people took the jobs for a good paycheck, they knew the risks and were responsible for their own safety. Lighten up, America. Stop assuming that Mr. Obama is responsible for any of this nonsense.

White House Spokesman Jay Carney at September 14, 2012 press briefing:
“Let’s be clear, these protests were in reaction to a video that had spread around the region.”

“The cause of the unrest was a video.”

“The reason why there is unrest is because of the film. This is in response to the film.”

“We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack.”

Barack Obama on The Daily Show on October 18 2012
“Every piece of information that we get, as we got it, we laid it out to the American people.”

Associated Press on October 19, 2012
“The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month’s deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.”

***************************************
When Obama says “we”, is he using it the same way Joe Biden means when he says “we” –as in the top two guys in the White House, but not the White House per se, but to inclued the White House spokesman, but also not the Obama re-election campaign?

” We’re going to fix it. All of it” – Obama.

No sir, you cannot fix to restore the four innocent lives that were refused to be saved with additional security. YOU and your comrade, Joe Biden blamed it on the video and locked the guy in jail to cover up for your failed policy, That’s criminal to certain degree. You and your comrade , Joe Biden blamed it on GOP to proposal cutting the funding but the first lady has no problem to blow $470,000,000.00 . That close to half a million dollars of taxpayers’ money for a sight seeing trip in Spain.

No sir,you spin around it but you cannot fix it . This may well be bigger than Watergate,

Gobama; So they’re responsible for their own deaths? Because they took the job? Are you really that much in the tank for Obama? One of the more amazingly dumb comments I’ve ever read. Definitely the dumbest I’ve read today.

Posted by: bush | October 19, 2012, 9:42 am 9:42 am

Sen. Biden voted for the Afghanistan resolution on Sept. 14, 2001 which authorized “the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States.”

And on Oct. 11, 2002, Biden voted for a resolution authorizing unilateral military action in Iraq, according to the Washington Post.

Well we fixed all of it after the destruction of the Twin Towers—by invading Iraq. The president should give it a try. There’s no better way to get reelected.

Posted by: bush | October 19, 2012, 9:42 am 9:42 am

Obama invaded Libya illegally and has destabilized the country, resulting in the first dead U.S. Ambassador since 1979.

I see someone commeted where is the anger toward George Bush? Please all of a sudden some of you put up this big front as if Bush was the best thing that ever happened to this country. Romney/ryan Republicans,Obama haters,teapartiers are all of a sudden the save the middle class, create jobs billboard.I sure wish they would have been this vocal about saving our jobs when Bush was shipping them overseas by the thousands every month. When Bush was president,all you heard was osama bin ladin,we’ve got to get him but when president Obama had him killed all of a sudden that wasn’t the right thing to do.The Republicans,Teapartiers and Obama haters whinned,moaned and groaned about that. This isn’t about save the economy,get people back to work,this is about shady,shiesty politics.If Romney were to win all this talk about jobs will go out the window.The unemployed will be the 47% Romney said he will not worry about.PHONEY,sad and phoney!!

Isn’t it absolutely amazing that the Party directly responsible for IRAQ – where hundreds of thousands of lives were lost and which helped drain our country financially – is cynically and disingenuously using 4 deaths in a volatile volatile situation of the world that was just freed from decades of dictatorial rule – in such a politicized manner? Stewart wasn’t ‘pressing’ the President. He was allowing the President a ‘forum’ away from the GOP politicization of it – to clarify what we know now. I cannot believe the very un-American manner in which the GOP and theiir candidate have handled this issue. especially with their ‘track record’.

Posted by: CND FOX | October 19, 2012, 9:54 am 9:54 am

Democrats made a stronger case for Iraq than Republicans did.

The slander of the President continues.If Mr. Obama was white none of this nonsense would be going on. This is nothing but racism,pure and simple. People who take risky jobs need to accept the consequences of their decisions. Mr. Obama has made the world a much safer place for all Americans.He has stopped 2 wars and has been awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. After all of that only Jim Crow could vote against him.

The first World Trade Center attack by Islamic terrorists occurred in 1993 on Clinton’s watch, years before Bush was elected. The Clinton administration called in the prosecutors instead of the Marines, giving Al Qaeda EIGHT YEARS to plan 9/11. The result? 3,000 dead Americans.

“Isn’t it absolutely amazing that the Party directly responsible for IRAQ…”
Posted by: CND FOX | October 19, 2012

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

“Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime … He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation … And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction … So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real…” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

@CND FOX, thanks for the stale laughs, as usual from you. Good luck with the dull shopworn mediamatters talking points and diversion. LOL. This became “political” because Obama lied about it, and is STILL lying about it. And the “it” involves deaths of Americans. Get it? Simple for sane people.

The CIA Chief just came out stating that the WH knew it was a terror attack with in hours. They also had all the information before they sent out Susan Rice to lie on five talk shows. Unbelievable. These inept people should all resign.

Posted by: Bush | October 19, 2012, 10:04 am 10:04 am

Obama slept through the Libya attack that killed the first U.S. Ambassador in 30 years.

Now of course lots of folks have pointed out after the fact that we had plenty of warning prior to the 9/11 attacks, but hindsight is 20-20. A nice big war helps everyone forget.

“They utterly destroyed the World Trade Center while I was reading nursery rhymes, and I still got reelected.”
Posted by: Bush | October 19, 2012, 10:04 am

The difference is that Bush got airborne on Air Force One right away to coordinate the defense and response to the attack, while Obama got airborne on Air Force One right away to head to a fundraiser in Las Vegas.

Priorities.

“The slander of the President continues.” (GOBAMA). Maybe you should check back in to Hotel Reality. Obama has gotten every break in the book, and even a bunch of breaks not in the book before before he strutted onto the national scene. Racism? Yeah, he has been allowed to slide by often at least partly BECAUSE he is half black. He himself, however, is a racist. He particularly dislikes Blacks who don’t need his Big Brother “help” and scff at the asinine notion of him being their “savior”.

To the person who wrote about the funding, before you point fingers at the GOP you should look at the voting record. More Dems and Repubs voted to cut funding. But, in fact, funding was not an issue wrt the lack of security, according to top State Dept officials.

What were the dim dems saying about Romney all summer — that he was “robotic” and distant. Now, Romney definitely comes across as engaing, bright,and quite down to earth. Ironically, Obama calling the deaths of Americans “not optimal” sounds super robotic — and super solipsistic. Obama the robotic and distant, and uber-selfish. And needless to say, there’s the lying thing still looming large for Obama.

The Libya issue is such a lie. Perhaps Obama made an indirect reference to terrorism in the rose garden, but then he went on the View and Letterman (taking advantage of crises like he always does) to blame America by stating that the attack was due to some video no one has seen. Then, Clinton repeats the line along with the White House Spokesman several times. Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the U.N., went on five networks’ Sunday shows and cast the attack as hardly a coordinated strike by terrorists. She said:
“We are obviously investigating this very closely. The FBI has a lead in this investigation,” Rice said Sept. 16 on “Fox News Sunday.” “The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack. That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video. People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya and that then spun out of control.
“But we don’t see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack. Obviously, we will wait for the results of the investigation and we don’t want to jump to conclusions before then. But I do think it’s important for the American people to know our best current assessment.”
Meanwhile, Biden suggests in the VP debate they didn’t know what happened and Clinton takes responsibility for the fiasco. I give CNN some credit for standing up to the administration when they retrieved the Ambassador’s journal. However, they and the rest of the media have been quiet about the congressional hearings. PATHETIC COVERUP and embarrassing journalism!

I wish Steward pressed Obama on just doing his job! I know it’s the campaign season, but this is ridiculous!

Most Americans watched a very inept and totally “dead” liberal media and presidency “tiptoe” around this issue and continued campaigning in the wake of this tragedy. I think most Americans were totally turned off by the lack of response by the media and the president. The media “hounds from hell” should have been snapping at the doors of Washington demanding all the facts surrounding the death of an American hero. Articles about his life, why he was in Libya and investigations into why security was pulled should have been front and center. Instead, President Obama and his liberal media were too busy trying to win him his re-election. I feel if President Obama is elected – it’s over the dead bodies of American heroes who were totally ignored for the sake of an election..

“Not optimal, unfortunate, a bump in the road”. As Gobama said, “They knew what they were getting into. They bought their ticket. They knew the risks.” Now that I think about it, I have to agree. How STUPID of them to go to work for these people!

Romney’s primary complaint is that the video issue got confused with what actually happened. That’s because Romney made a total fool out of himself with his politicization of the event as it happened real time (he was just spoiling to pounce on a foreign policy issue in order to erase his previous foreign affairs failings) and doubled down on his foolhardiness with his grossly inappropriate press conference the next morning. Now he’s fanning his flames onto Obama to cover up his own stupid actions.

The ‘vile…and I mean vile’ politicization effort of the right wing of 4 American deaths – will NEVER CHANGE THE RESULTS OF THIS ELECTION. People with brains – who aren’t victims of a shallow soundbite strategy – KNOW BETTER. And this American…does not want to put ‘neo-con ideology back into office – that would blow something like this out of proportion, in the manner they are doing now – which would result in more lives being lost.

Folks, try and imagine this if you can. From the very beginning of the incident the State Department was in communications with the Consulate in Benghazi. They were in desperate straits there and State knew it. For SIX HOURS they were threatened and asked for help. State did not send in any help from Special Ops. They left them to dangle in the wind for SIX HOURS. Their failure to send it any help resulted in the murder of these Americans. Can we not forgo ideology and agree that the death of these Americans DEMAND a complete an unbiased investigation. It won’t come before the election but at least we must vindicate these people.

Don’t you Obama supporters think the president has more important things to do? Or is this what we’ve become?

Obama’s not going to fix anything, period. He was one of the chief culprits in BILLY CLINTONS HOUSING FIASCO. Barry brought in all the BAD LOANS. Notice how he likes to blame Bush for ALL the failure he helped cause.

The one good thing about a Romney Presidency is all his followers will get to go to the planet Kolob. I highly recommend googling this planet if plan to vote for Romney.

If Obama really had American security as his top priority, his State Department wouldn’t have rejected requests for increased security, he wouldn’t be proposing cutting the military to the bone, and he wouldn’t unilaterally be cutting our strategic arsenal.

I’m not voting for Obama because it’s apparent his priorities are screwed up and he doesn’t do his job.

Obama has pandered to Muslims in the Middle East by giving a speech in Cairo praising Islam, trying to distance us from Israel, by taking out references to “Muslim extremism” in FBI textbooks, by pressuring authorities to jail the film maker of the video, and by running an ad in Pakistan(in which he and Hillary appeared personally) apologizing for the video. This hasn’t worked and the stupidthinking behind it is so naive. He needs to go.

From the President’s speech to the UN (I dont see an apology – but I guess it’s how you perceive it)
That is what we saw play out the last two weeks, as a crude and disgusting video sparked outrage throughout the Muslim world. I have made it clear that the United States government had nothing to do with this video, and I believe its message must be rejected by all who respect our common humanity. It is an insult not only to Muslims, but to America as well – for as the city outside these walls makes clear, we are a country that has welcomed people of every race and religion. We are home to Muslims who worship across our country. We not only respect the freedom of religion – we have laws that protect individuals from being harmed because of how they look or what they believe. We understand why people take offense to this video because millions of our citizens are among them.

I know there are some who ask why we don’t just ban such a video. The answer is enshrined in our laws: our Constitution protects the right to practice free speech. Here in the United States, countless publications provoke offense. Like me, the majority of Americans are Christian, and yet we do not ban blasphemy against our most sacred beliefs. Moreover, as President of our country, and Commander-in-Chief of our military, I accept that people are going to call me awful things every day, and I will always defend their right to do so. Americans have fought and died around the globe to protect the right of all people to express their views – even views that we disagree with.

I am voting for President Obama because he has done a magnificent job, has created millions of jobs, has ended two wars, has killed bin Laden, saved General Motors , saved Medicare, saved Social Security and stopped a Great Depression. Only a racist would ignore his great accomplishments and vote against him .He is brilliant and a real gift to our country. Obama,your so fine you blow my mind-OBAMA!

if his highness really wanted to fix things, he would get the heck out

he’s a true sociopath and narcissist…without a doubt

Tinmonty, ,Romney is up by 4 in Pennsylvania.—————No he’s not , as a matter of fact Obama is ahead by 2-8 points in Penn. in ALL the polls . All of them . As a matter of fact the Romney campaign is not even running any more ads there ; they’ve given Penn. up as a lost cause . Read the news much ?

How about gettin’ those “journalists” at the network news outlets to “press” Obama on these issues? THAT would be refreshing and honest. Their coddling of this president is sickening. Any youngster out there enrolled in a university “journalsim” program best beware of what you’ll be asked to do.

Questions the media needs to ask the Obama administration (but I won’t hold my breath)

1. If the “battle” went on for 6 hours, why were only Americans killed?
2. There were real time videos that were watched at the time. There was a drone sent to video it from above. WHY wasn’t a drone sent that had bombs on it?
3. If the “battle” went on for 6 hours, why weren’t planes sent from Tripoli to assist?
4. IF Obama is now stating he called it a terror attack since the day after, why did Susan Rice AND Jay Carney state it was the video? Is he now going to claim he didn’t know what Jay Carney was saying? When he was on the campaign trail or on one of his many TV interviews, why didn’t he state that Jay was incorrect?

Any number of Americans getting killed is a big deal. Is it tragic? -yes
Did the state department screw up? absolutely.
Is this a cover up? I don’t think so. I think the president just didn’t have the information when he should have. Government has hierachies, as does the state department.
Is this the presidents fault? Yes, and Mr,. Obama has taken full responsibility even when Hilary Clinton said it was her mistake.
If this were not an election year, would the killing of these four Americans be getting as much air time? Sadly,no.
Is this issue being used politically by mr. Romney’s campaign? You betcha!

Obama is way ahead in most swing states . If the Gallup poll ( Romney + 7 ) wasn’t such a questionable outlier Romney would actually be behind nationally . All the other national polls show Obama / Romney within 2 points . How much dirty $$ is Romney /Ryan and the RNC paying Gallup to skew the polling I wonder ?

Uh KALLIE_SMF, please stop fibbibng so poorly. Obama is not “way ahead” in ANY swing state. Facts: embrace them.

FREDERIC MARC: “The so-called “math” that does not add up…” – - – ROFLMAO Talk abou delusional willfull ignorance. FACT: A 20% across the board increase reduces revenue by nearly $5T over ten years. FACT: Eliminating ALL tax deductions only increases revenue by around $3T at most. FACT: The increase in revenue CANNOT pay for the tax cut – period. Even 1st graders can do that math and understand that the math, the REAL math and NOT so-called math, does NOT add up. And that does not even factor in how he wants to increase military spending. Even 1st graders can do the math to figure out that ROMNEY IS LYING AGAIN.

Romney might win Florida and Virginia , and maybe even Colorado , but that won’t be nearly enough to win it all . You got kleenex ? You are gonna need them . Better go stock up now loser .

The Ambassador asked for more security…did President Obama or our Secretary of State Clinton listen??? NO!!! Obama is not doing what he’s suppose to be doing!!! Protecting US people and helping US people!!! He’s toooo busy playing golf and drinking beer to CARE!!!! Obama has NOT worked for US!!!!!

WHERESMYMONEY: “2. There were real time videos that were watched at the time. There was a drone sent to video it from above. WHY wasn’t a drone sent that had bombs on it?” – - – And you KNOW for a fact that drone was unarmed how exactly? And you KNOW for a fact that an armed drone or the weapons to arm a drone were even available how exactly? Plus, only an idiot would think they could risk dropping a bomb into such a close quarters fire fight. BTW, the drone was only on station for the last hour of that attack.

Lars Venn, no reputable economist has been able to get Romney’s magical tax plan to add up. Partisan hacks don’t count. They will say anything for money.

“No reputable economist…”
Posted by: Librarian53 | October 19, 2012, 12:21 pm

Support Obama’s agenda, and you’re suddenly a ‘repubable economist’.

I would be ‘amused’ at many of these comments about the Libyan scandal if it were not so tragic. Americans are attemtping to trivalize the trajedy of this incident by saying that more embassy staff died under other Presidents or other outlandish excuses. Folks, the only thing you ought to be concerned about is that they were murdered, they were Americans in service to their country and let’s find out how they died so tragically and needlessly. They are your fellow countrymen. That is all that is important here not who is President or who is Sec. of State. If they were needlessly slain then I want to know it and I want the guilty parties to pay. If they died at the hand of incompetency we need to know it to ensure it doesn’t happen again. What is wrong with your people?

Yes, Obama’s congenital and continual lying about matters of national importance and American deaths should not be politicized, according to Librarian53. Real dumb and ineffective “argument”. Obama is going to lose.

Having Romney slightly ahead works to Obama’s advantage.———— I was thinking the same thing myself . It’s actually going to help voter turnout for Obama if he’s perceived by his support base as being the underdog . Thanks Gallup !

JAMICA: “Yes, Obama’s congenital and continual lying about matters of national importance and American deaths should not be politicized,” – - – PROVE he lied. PROVE he knowingly and intentionally misled us. EXACTLY how do you KNOW he lied? Do you have magical telepathic powers that allow you to read his mind to know his intent? Do you have magical transformational powers that allowed you to be a fly on walls to know what he knew and when he knew it? ROMNEY and a whole bunch of conservative propagandists were lying every time they said or implied that it took the President two weeks to refer to the attack as a terrorist attack. The FACT is he did that on the 12th AND the 13th.

Remember the attitude we had when 9/11 happened, that is the correct message to be sending, one of unity against the enemy who killed Americans.
Posted by: Librarian53 | October 19, 2012, 12:17 pm 12:17 pm

And why did we have that attitude? Because the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DIDN’T place the blame on an American citizen for the tragedy.

Librarian said “Shame on Republicans who are politicizing these deaths”======No-one is “politicizing these deaths”. People want AND DESERVE honest answers about what happened! I do not blame Obama ,or his administration, for what happened this night. Evil like this is almost impossible to anticipate, and warnings that scream like red flags now, may have seemed routine and easily overlooked by the administration. Mistakes were made—-mistakes will always be made no matter who is President! What I have a HUGE problem with is the way the Obama administration handled the situation AFTER the fact! Blaming an unknown you-tube VIDEO before they knew the facts was childish and irresponsible—-and IMO, libel. He still refuses to accept responsibility! All he had to do was stand in front of the Country and say “We made a mistake. We underestimated our enemies and what they were capable and willing to do.We did not provide enough security. We will do everything to make sure it never happens again. I apologize to these men and their families” =====THAT’S ALL HE HAD TO DO! Finished and done! Now, he looks like he’s either hiding something or has absolutely NO clue what’s going on under his nose. Neither is going to stand well with the voter.

WHERESMYMONEY: “And why did we have that attitude? Because the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES DIDN’T place the blame on an American citizen for the tragedy.” – - – I guess you are not aware of the fact that our intelligence folks intercepted a transmission from one of the attackers, presumably one of the leaders, reporting to Al Quida that they did not begin their attack until after the protest began. That intercept rather strongly implied a DIRECT connection between the protests over the movie and it rather strongly implied there was a protest at the consulate before the attack. The most important questions about that intercept are how many people did it cause to wrongly believe there was a protest at the consulate, and how long did it take people to know with certainty that the protest the intercept was referring to was the protest in Cairo and not the one in Libya.

Of course, whenever conservatives need to crticise the government and the administration for doing something wrong they rather conveniently assume everyone in the government is perfect and infallible and incapable of making mistakes like that. And of course whenever they need to criticize the size of the government or what the government does they then rather conveniently make the opposite assumption that everyone in the government is totally incompetent and they cannot do anything right. And of course another convenient self-serving narrative conservative love is that when Republicans/conservatives make a mistake by saying something that is wrong those people are just fallible humans who make mistakes. But when Democrats make exactly the same kind of mistake those people are not fallible humans who make mistakes, they infallible liars instead.

WHERESMYMONEY: “2. There were real time videos that were watched at the time. There was a drone sent to video it from above. WHY wasn’t a drone sent that had bombs on it?” – – – And you KNOW for a fact that drone was unarmed how exactly?
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 12:19 pm 12:19 pm

Because, by all reports, it was called a video SURVEILLANCE camera drone. It wasn’t called an ARMED video surveillance camera.

We have surgical bombs. This administration failed miserably, and then they covered it up with lies, and you and all Obama’s other Jesse Lee employees come on these sites to try and continue the cover up.

You would never expect the Republican extremists to say anything patriotic in response. They couldn’t even do that with the take down of bin Laden. They have one-track, greedy minds – get us back in power regardless of what has to be said.

Unexpected occurrences aside , the national polls will show Mr. Obama moving ahead next week pre-debate . I’ve seen this before . Mitt Romney is getting a little surge just from being the ” something new and different ” candidate , but people will quickly tire of hearing load after load of non-specific b/s ing generalizations about what he will or won’t do if elected president . And Mr. Romney can’t and won’t say what he would REALLY do ( i.e. raise taxes on the middle class to support a(nother) unwarranted and unnecessary war in the Middle East ( aka a(nother) US Defense industry contractor bonanza ) . , because then only about 3 or 4 percent of the US electorate would support him .

WHATEVER: “What I have a HUGE problem with is the way the Obama administration handled the situation AFTER the fact! Blaming an unknown you-tube VIDEO before they knew the facts was childish and irresponsible—-”- – - No, the only childish and irresponsible thing here is your FALSE statement. Either you are grossly ignorant of the facts or you are grossly dishonest. The FACT is that the video WAS NOT unknown in Egypt because the producer e-mailed clips of an Arabic version to TV stations (five of them I think if I remember correctly) in Egypt and at least one of those stations boradcast the Arabic version of the clip on the Sunday BEFORE the protests. The producer WANTED the Arab/Muslim world to know about his video and he got exactly what he wanted. So, the FACT is that the video was well known in Cairo and the Embassy had very good reason to know about the rising tensions because of the video and attempt a proactive action to defuse the volatile situation as a matter of self-preservation. That is why they sent out their press-release – self-preservation.

“You would never expect the Republican extremists to say anything patriotic in response.”
Posted by: Johnny K | October 19, 2012, 1:05 pm

If Obama is personally attacked, he’s free to apologize and make excuses as to why his attackers were justified.

When the country is attacked, and the president apologizes for the contry and makes excuses that justify the attack, then he can go to hell.

Next debate is on…yep…foreign policy. Obama better put on lots of deodorant, cause he’ll be a sweatin’ plenty. Another victory for Romney — promise.

“My son is not very optimal, my son is very dead.”

Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 1:08 pm 1:08 pm

“It has pappened before. Some people have called me an intellectual. please honor my verbose propaganda. Thanks.”
Posted by: Davem
If someone called you an “intellectual”, then they must have worked in a convenience store, or somewhere equally cognitive. You are just a silly hack.

Shame on Republicans who are politicizing these deaths.

Posted by: Librarian53 | October 19, 2012, 12:23 pm 12:23 pm

From the MailOnline (UK of course, because they report our news better than we do):

The mother of an American diplomat killed during a terrorist raid on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has hit out at Barack Obama for describing the attack as ‘not optimal’, saying: ‘My son is not very optimal – he is also very dead.’

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline today, Pat Smith, whose son Sean died in the raid, said: ‘It was a disrespectful thing to say and I don’t think it’s right.

‘How can you say somebody being killed is not very optimal? I don’t think the President has the right idea of the English language.’

Speaking from her home in San Diego, Mrs Smith, 72, continued: ‘It’s insensitive to say my son is not very optimal – he is also very dead. I’ve not been “optimal” since he died and the past few weeks have been pure hell.

‘I am still waiting for the truth to come out and I still want to know the truth. I’m finally starting to get some answers but I won’t give up.

‘There’s a lot of stupid things that have been said about my son and what happened and this is another one of them.’

According to witnesses and investigators the Islamist militia group Ansar al-Shariah(Libya) was responsible for the attack on the U.S. compound and mission at Benghazi, Libya. Also according to witnesses and investigators, Abu Khattala is one of the leaders of Ansar al-Shariah who was present during the assault on Benghazi compound.

According to reports, Abu Khattala denies having a role in the Benghazi attack, but he has said the attack had “grown” out of a “protest” against a video that mocked the Prophet Muhammad and Islam. Abu Khattala also has said he is not a member of Al Qaeda, although he said he would be proud to be associated with Al Qaeda.

To Learn More Search: Abu Khattala and/or Ansar al-Shariah(Libya)

“He didn’t.”
Posted by: Johnny K | October 19, 2012, 1:17 pm

He laid the blame on our First Amendment rights, lamenting to middle-easterners that our Constitution, unfortunately, makes such insulting disgusting videos perfectly legal. He was apologizing for the U.S. Constitution.

Posted by: Dave | October 19, 2012, 1:23 pm 1:23 pm

You’ve been willfully unemployed and leeching off taxpayers Obama’s entire term. Just sayin’.

DAVEM, only 4 dead, guess that’s worthy of a cover-up! This president has far exceeded the slime factor of Nixon.

Posted by: neokans | October 19, 2012, 1:26 pm 1:26 pm

It’s a major scandal, much worse than Watergate. Nobody died in Watergate.

This election is not going to be decided by Republican extremists. It will be decided by sensible, decent, ordinary Americans. The results will be shocking for the Republican extremists but good for the country.

Larry glad you are admitting before-hand, that Obama is going to have his backside handed to him on a platter by decent ordinary people.

President Obama has the BEST record at protecting our embassies. Just sayin’.

POSTED BY: DAVE—First ambassador killed in over 30 years on Obummers watch and he has tried to cover up his poor decisions. His record sucks

May I expand a bit my previous post that contained all that is within our current and recently past purview regarding these roundabout and raucously riling issues? Thanks. Let me expand on that a bit: the concentric metrics of Obama spasms in maledictory attempts at reconciling with wacky weirdsters from the left has resulted in the degenerate deconstruction of the maladies of misty mists afflicting his naughty attempts at radical reelection. He made a mistake, it can be ceremoniously cretinized and rectified by November, with luck and more jock-strap like support from sycophants everywhere. Surely and sanctimoniously, craven charts and gluttoneous graphs surreptitious stats can aid in the visual and experiential experiences of pontificatory propaganda on and surrounding our egregious attempts at marauding and marranging the moronical masses who no not knowingly know which dire direction to praise, plead, or stumblingly stumble, or even truculently trot. Heed my advice and info contained solidly and slippery within, or just be a clear dummy or a prancing poltroon.

So, you don’t thing the people in the Embassy had a right to do ANYTHING possible to protect themselves from the growing tensions and anger over the video
Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 1:18 pm 1:18 pm

I thinK the people in the Embassy had a right to do ANYTHING possible to protect themselves… including having bullets. Unfortunately, they weren’t allowed bullets. And there you go about the video again. IT WAS SEPT. 11TH!!!

Come on now people. We need to cut Obama some slack here. It is hard to come up with one lie after another after another about how you failed to not only protect the consulate but how you failed to come clean with the American people when he is so busy flying from fundraiser to fundraiser in between kissing the Muslim world’s a** !!!!

Real human lives, every one of them. Family, friends, loved ones.

Posted by: Dave | October 19, 2012, 1:38 pm 1:38 pm

Four Americans are dead due to a totally preventable attack made possible because of an inept Obama Administration and State Department who is STILL covering up what happened there. Those are the facts. No amount of Obama Kool Aid can change them.

Who cares what Obama jabbers at this point? He’s a flat-out liar. Proven over and over again.

DAVEM, had no idea you were so intelectually brilliant! You should consider stumping for Obama. I would love to see his poll numbers with you as a critical spokesperson.

Posted by: Nene | October 19, 2012, 1:46 pm 1:46 pm

According to the Republican right, Bush and Reagan were of course not at fault for all those deaths at American embassies under their administrations. Obama on the other hand is totally at fault. That’s the Republican two-face, unpatriotic hypocrisy for you.

Libya “lies” aside, it still is a fact that many of us won’t donate more money to Obama unless he focuses more heavily on the issues confronting the gay and lesbian communities. Our votes need to be worth something.

“EXACTLY how do you KNOW this attack was preventable?” – B+K

Exactly!
If anything, we know under this NoBo Administration that this attack was not preventable.
No Way No How!

Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 1:42 pm 1:42 pm

FIND ONE article that called it an ARMED surveillance CAMERA drone.

“A surgical strike is a military attack which results in, was intended to result in, or is claimed to have resulted in only damage to the intended legitimate military target, and no or minimal collateral damage to surrounding structures, vehicles, buildings, etc.”

The administration failed miserably and went into cover up mode. The WH repeated the LIE of the video until Sept. 20th, when they were forced to admit that it was a terror attack.

Prediction… Maybe before the debate Monday, certainly before the election, we will get another “we got him” press conference touting how the administration killed the “mastermind” behind this terror attack. And the media will SING the praises, never bothering to check to see if it is true or not until after the election.

Posted by: Dave | October 19, 2012, 1:50 pm

All Obama had to do is come out from day-one and say it was a terrorist attack. Obama wanted to claim on the campaign trail that al Qaeda was defeated, and he couldn’t do that if they just killed our ambassador to Libya.

Obama lied to the American people to protect a campaign issue.

All Obama had to do is come out from day-one and say it was a terrorist attack.

Posted by: Larry | October 19, 2012, 2:01 pm 2:01 pm

He did. Get the transcript.

WASHINGTON (AP) – The CIA station chief in Libya reported to Washington within 24 hours of last month’s deadly attack on the U.S. Consulate that there was evidence it was carried out by militants, not a spontaneous mob upset about an American-made video ridiculing Islam’s Prophet Muhammad, U.S. officials have told The Associated Press.

It is unclear who, if anyone, saw the cable outside the CIA at that point and how high up in the agency the information went. The Obama administration maintained publicly for a week that the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi that killed U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans was a result of the mobs that staged less-deadly protests across the Muslim world around the 11th anniversary of the 9/11 terror attacks on the U.S.

—-

Nobody with a brain believes that the Obama administration didn’t have this information a week after a U.S. Ambassador was killed.

Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:05 pm 2:05 pm Even the Communist News Network CNN admitted they were wrong. Why did Oblammer keep saying it was the movie trailer then for week after? Answer: Becuase Oblammer was lying thru his teeth and got caught!

WHERESMYMONEY: “FIND ONE article that called it an ARMED surveillance CAMERA drone.” – - – ROFLMAO Please provide one single example that you are capable of an intelligent rational thought. The words “surveillance drone” instead of “armed surveillance drone” does not constitute proof, does not necessarily mean, that a surveillance drone is not armed. To keep insisting otherwise is stupid. And when exactly does the media usually refer to a surveillance drone as an armed sruveillance drone? AFTER it has fired on a target because that action confirms it was armed. But referring to a drone as a surveillance drone does NOT mean any particular drone is/was unarmed. At most that means the media does not KNOW whether or not a particular drone was armed. Usually the drones capable of carrying weapons are armed just in case they find or get a target of opportunity.

“He did. Get the transcript.”
Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:05 pm

No. If you want to refute me, then YOU post the quotes.

Under President Reagan

April 18, 1983 – Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide car-bomb attack; 63 dead.

Dec. 12, 1983 – Kuwait City, Kuwait: Shiite truck bombers attacked the U.S. embassy, killing 5 and injuring 80.

Sept. 20, 1984 – east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S. embassy annex, killing 24.

Under President Bush

June 14, 2002 – Karachi, Pakistan: bomb explodes outside American consulate in Karachi, Pakistan, killing 12.

Dec. 6, 2004 – Jeddah, Saudi Arabia: terrorists storm the U.S. consulate, killing 5 consulate employees.

Sept. 16, 2008 – Yemen: a car bomb and a rocket strike the U.S. embassy in Yemen as staff arrived to work, killing 16 people

I get it. Things are better now because only four Consulate people died this time.

larry” “He did. Get the transcript.”
Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:05 pm
No. If you want to refute me, then YOU post the quotes.”———————-”Its on the record” obviously cannot and will slink away back under his rock.

Obama only talked about one thing in his brief and concise statement – the terrorist attack on our consulate. He talked about nothing else. What did you think ‘acts of terror’ related to? His puppy hurting his leg? A banana attack on the moon?
Posted by: Sue | October 19, 2012, 2:26 pm

From the same speech:
“I visited the graves of troops who made the ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan at the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery, and had the opportunity to say thank you and visit some of our wounded warriors at Walter Reed.”

Was the ambassador to Libya killed in Afghanistan or Iraq? No?

Were the dead killed in Benghazi buried in Arlington Cemetery? No?

Did he visit them at Walter Reed? No?

In that case, he DID talk about other things than the Benghazi attack in that speech. He was all over the place in that speech, and his acts of terror line was a generality while his official spokes-kid Jay Carney denied-denied-denied that it was anything but a spontaneous protest.

Funny Sue, if that really what the liar in Cheif meant then why did he send Jay Carney out with Billery, and Rice to all say it was a video? Then go on to the UN and make a speech aplogizing for the video that caused the attack? Wake up Kool Aid drinkers. 0bama lied, Americans died!

Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:34 pm 2:34 pm

Same here. But I’m not giving up bacon. ;)

Stewart didn’t “press” Obama at all. He sat there being his towel-boy. But between these two ideologues, they picked the wrong wording — meaning they picked the wording that truthfully reveals how little Obama gives a damn about anyone other than himself.

None of this matters , Obama is going to bury that duplicitous duo of dunces over the next three weeks .

Posted by: davem | October 19, 2012, 2:35 pm 2:35 pm

REALCLEAR MAP: Romney takes first lead in electoral college…

Closing 26-point gap, Romney’s favorability rating tops Obama’s for first time…

PA SHOCK POLL: R 49% O 45%…

VA: R 50% O 47%…

FL: R 51% O 46%…

Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:38 pm 2:38 pm

McClatchy just revealed that Obama handed Benghazi to Al Qaeda.

FACT CHECKER: “Under President Reagan

April 18, 1983 – Beirut, Lebanon: U.S. embassy destroyed in suicide car-bomb attack; 63 dead.

Dec. 12, 1983 – Kuwait City, Kuwait: Shiite truck bombers attacked the U.S. embassy, killing 5 and injuring 80.

Sept. 20, 1984 – east Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded outside the U.S. embassy annex, killing 24.”

You forgot:
Oct 23, 1983 – Beirut, Lebanon: truck bomb exploded at the U.S. Marine corps barracks killing 220 U.S. Marines, 18 U.S. Navy sailors, and 58 French servicemen.

Shortly after that bombing my cruiser (USS Arkansas CGN41) did several Navy Gunfire Support (NGFS) patrols at Beirut within heavy machine gun fire range of the shoreline. I liked to call NGFS line ops because all we did was draw a line on a chart and then go back and forth on that line at 3-5 knots. Pretty boring actually because we didn’t do anything until we got to the end of the line and the bridge rang up a standard bell to turn around and get back on the line. We never fired a shot. But we could hear weapons fire in the city and see fires at night.

Posted by: Noz | October 19, 2012, 2:41 pm 2:41 pm

President Obama’s Rose Garden statement the morning after the attack . . .

“No ACTS OF TERROR will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible ACT. And make no mistake, justice will be done.”

WHERESMYMONEY: “1. The press releases called them surveillance CAMERA drones.” – - – ROFLMAO You really insist on digging that hole deeper and deeper. Yeah, and we all know how the press/media NEVER EVER gets any details wrong or NEVER EVER leaves out any details because they just don’t know every detail. Yeah, we all know exactly how perfect and infallible the media is. So what? ALL of the drones capable of carrying weapons are ALSO “surveillance CAMERA” drones. They actually several different sensors on them. ALL of them. You intellectually dishonest semantic game and rationalizing is pathetic.

Quit lying. The President was not ‘all over the place”. He was talking about acts of terror. The reference to Arlington came directly out of the President acknowledging 9/11 as a day that marks another act of terror and how he’d visited Arlington on that date.
Posted by: It’s on Record | October 19, 2012, 2:38 pm

Yes, he mentioned acts of terror.
He also mentioned Iraq.
He also mentioned Afghanistan.
He also mentioned wounded warriors at Walter Reed.
He also mentioned the hallowed grounds of Arlington Cemetery.
He also mentioned the original attacks on 11 September 2001.

Were those killed in Benghazi buried at Arlington Cemetery? Were those killed in Benghazi taken to Walter Reed? Were those killed in Benghazi killed eleven years ago? Were those killed in Benghazi receive their fatal wounds in Iraq or Afghanistan?

If you can answer ‘no’ to any of those questions, then Obama’s speech included many things other than Benghazi.

Posted by: Larry | October 19, 2012, 2:49 pm 2:49 pm

You need to read a bit better.

President Obama’s Rose Garden statement the morning after the attack . . .

“No ACTS OF TERROR will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible ACT. And make no mistake, justice will be done.”

The President was not ‘all over the place”. He was talking about acts of terror. The reference to Arlington came directly out of the President acknowledging 9/11 as a day that marks another act of terror and how he’d visited Arlington on that date. Same with his acknowledgement of those who served and were injured out of 9/11 and Afghanistan.

He did pay tribute to ‘those who serve’ including the ambassador and our troops. What would you expect after a terrorist attack and deaths overseas? Get real.

It appears that DEBBIE also needs to take a strong reality pill. Amusing. Obama — one and done.

SUE: “Obama only talked about one thing in his brief and concise statement – the terrorist attack on our consulate. He talked about nothing else. What did you think ‘acts of terror’ related to? His puppy hurting his leg? A banana attack on the moon?” – - – EXACTLY Clear thinking people capable of even the most minimal critical thinking skills to allow for even the most minimal independent rational thought understand quite well that what you are referring to is CONTEXT. The President was not talking about the weather. The President was not talking about the results of a baseball game. The President’s only purpose, the President’s only subject, the President’s entire CONTEXT of and for that speech was the attack on the Libyan consulate which he referred to as an act of terror. He did it again the next day on the 13th. Since the debate I have heard and watched tapes of both speeches. Context, a concept partisan conservatives are blytheringly ignroant about whenever such ignorance is convenient. But when a Democrat dares to cherry pick a few words from the comments a Republican makes, and then take those cherry picked words out of context to change the original intent and meaning? THEN conservatives/Republicans understand context because then they whine and cry and squeel like a stuck pig, but only when it happens to one of their own. Then they do it to a Democrat they conveniently and blytheringly ignorant about the importance of context.

LARRY: “If you can answer ‘no’ to any of those questions, then Obama’s speech included many things other than Benghazi.” – - – In the CONTEXT of “acts of terror,” aka terrorist acts, aka terrorist attacks, aka terroism. Those are all synonomous terms, especially when the CONTEXT of a speech is a terrorist attack. The stupid intellectually dishonest semantic games some people play to politicise a tragedy are pathetic.

Clear thinking people capable of even the most minimal critical thinking skills to allow for even the most minimal independent rational thought understand quite well that what you are referring to is CONTEXT.

Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm

It doesn’t take a lot of intellect to vote for hope and change.

“The stupid intellectually dishonest semantic games some people play to politicise a tragedy are pathetic.”
Posted by: B-K KnightRider
That is PRECISELY what you and other Obamamites are doing in your desperate attempts to save a sinking (and lying) president. So, your reverse reality is pathetic. And it’s not working with many thinking people.

Clear thinking people capable of even the most minimal critical thinking skills to allow for even the most minimal independent rational thought understand quite well that what you are referring to is CONTEXT.

Posted by: B-K KnightRider | October 19, 2012, 2:57 pm 2:57 pm

Do not expect the Republican extremists to use rational thought or facts, or context – it’s a contradiction in terms.

In addition to what JANA provides at 2:57 our intel folks also intercepted a transmission from one of the attackers to Al Qaeda reporting that they did not begin their attack until after the protest began. Like I said earlier in the day, that intercept strongly implied that there was a protest at the consulate which also implied the attack had something to do with the videor because – the protest (specifically in Cairo) was because of the video. As JANA’s quotes clearly demonstrate, the attack was the attackers version of protest.

Posted by: Noz | October 19, 2012, 3:02 pm 3:02 pm

Big Bird! Binders! Palin!

JANA: “Do not expect the Republican extremists to use rational thought or facts, or context – it’s a contradiction in terms.” – - – LOL I don’t expect anything of the time. For several years now I have been routinely DEMONSTRATING, i.e. providing evidence by quoting them and then explaining the flaws in their reasoning, that nearly all of the ones who post in here are incapable or using rational thought to provide cogent arguments. Sometimes I see a conservative provide a cogent argument for something, but NEVER when they are attacking an idea they don’t like.

On 9/11, George W. Bush was literally “deer in the headlights” for 15 minutes – then spend hours flying around the country, afraid to land. Immediately after the Benghazi attack, Barack Obama goes into the rose garden to speak to the press and tell them that we have a problem and we are not going to rest until we fix it.

…and Romney and the GOP want to claim that President Obama was “confused”???

Come on, Repubs, it was YOUR guy who played Chicken Little all day – NOT Barack Obama!

The longer I live, the more utterly DISGUSTED I am with REPUBLICANS!!!

BK,

He and his administration thought the film provoked the attack that is clear. There was and is no evidence of it, yet the president mentioned the film obliquely in the Rose Garden speech, at the U.N. six times and Susan Rice gave interviews on five Sunday talk shows claiming this false assertion. If they didn’t know then they should have been saying they didn’t know. What they were saying was that they were pretty sure and they weren’t afraid to put that story out there. Now they’re paying for it.

If you deny these facts, there’s not much point continuing a discussion.

To me the damning issue is that more security was requested and was denied in a country whose civil war we helped create without an act of Congress to get involved in the first place. As an American, the abuse of power and subsequent negligence that helped lead to 4 American deaths is much more troublesome and should be condemned as irresponsible leadership by all. If he’s going to take credit for killing bin Laden (not saying he shouldn’t to some degree), then he better step up for some blame and explain his administration’s actions when things go wrong.

NEWCOUNTRYMAN: ““If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.” This is something someone would say who’s more interested in how the deaths impacts them politically.” – - – My, how dishonest of you to take the President’s statement out of CONTEXT. The President only parroted the words Stewart used. Stewart directly asked if it certain things were optimal. That was Stewart’s language. If you knew anything at all about effective listening and active listening skills you might understand that the President was actually using very vallid and very effective interpersonal communication technique.

Fact Checker (and Dave ) are full of baloney
#1 Karachi 2002 embassy “attack”-bus bomb near a Sheraton hotel, never even inside outer wall of compound. No Americans or embassy employees killed.
#2 Jeddah 2004. consulate attacked, never able to penetrate consulate building. No Americans killed..
#3 Yemen 2008. never even able to penetrate the compound, no Americans killed.
Some of the 33 “embassy” deaths were actually local soldiers killed in shootouts with attackers.
It is too bad some posters here can’t tell the difference between truth and propaganda.

LARRY: “According to you, we can link everything to anything in that speech, and context ceases to have any meaning.” – - – ROFLMAO Go back to shool and take some courses in communication, English Composition, and literature. Maybe then you will understand. I can’t teach such a complex concept from the perspective of three different disciplines for you to get an adequate understanding of the realities of language and how much context matters and in how many different ways context matters.

The context of a sentence matters to the meaning of the words in a sentence. The context of a paragraph matters to the meaning of the words and sentencese in a paragraph. The context of a section of parapraphs, especially in relations to a common theme and motifs, matter to the meaning of the words and sentences and parapraphs in a section/group of a larger speech or page or paper. The context of the environment in which a conversation or speech occurs matters. The intent of the message sender provides another layer of context. The barriers and filters of the recievers perceptions, values, and beliefs adds another layer of context. Then, when we are considering oral interpersonal communication, ALL of the non-verbal cues and sources of symbolic meaning add another layer/influence to context. Three semesters from those three disciplines (one each of communications, English Comp, literature) would only begin to give you a foundation to fully understand the importance of context. Then we can add courses in philosophy (especially logic), psychology, sociology, and cultural anthropology to build upon that foundation to get a more thorough understanding.

So yes, context matters, and context matters a LOT. And it is quite clear that you really don’t understand how context matters or how much context matters. Don’t feel bad, most people don’t really understand it. A fundamental reality of language is that the full meaning of language goes way beyond the literal meaning of the words, and it goes way way way beyond the literal meaning of a few words that are cherry picked out of context.

He and his administration thought the film provoked the attack that is clear. There was and is no evidence of it, yet the president mentioned the film obliquely in the Rose Garden speech, at the U.N. six times and Susan Rice gave interviews on five Sunday talk shows claiming this false assertion.

Posted by: Ken | October 19, 2012, 3:16 pm 3:16 pm

Not once in the U.N. presentation did the President blame the Libyan attack on the film. Not once in the Rose Garden presentation did the President lame the Libyan attack on the film. Not even Susan Rice blamed the video for the attack . ..

“We believe that folks in Benghazi, a small number of people came to the embassy to — or to the consulate, rather, to replicate the sort of challenge that was posed in Cairo. And then as that unfolded, it seems to have been hijacked, let us say, by some individual clusters of extremists who came with heavier weapons, weapons that as you know in — in the wake of the revolution in Libya are — are quite common and accessible.”

KEN: “He and his administration thought the film provoked the attack that is clear. There was and is no evidence of it,..” – - – That is patently false. Someone here is either grossly ignorant of the facts (which several of us have explained here), or just plain dishonest.

BEABEA: “No B_K Knightrider, lol, you didn’t provide much of anything, other than what other obama bots have “provided” before in desperation. It’s still quite clear that Obama and his administration lied repeatedly for two weeks. Sorry, people just aren’t that stupid.” – - – WRONG Several of us have provided FACTS and rational reasons. NOT hollow opinions, but FACTS, and RATIONAL reasons/explanations. You were either to lazy to actually read all of the relevant comments, have enough of a reading comprehension problem to understand our comments, or simply engaging in perverse rationalizations and gross self-delusions. And yes, as you and several others demonstrate quiete clearly, some people really are that stupid or that delusional or that irrational because they are rabidly partisan ideologues who are totally incapable of independent RATIONAL thought.

“KEN: “He and his administration thought the film provoked the attack that is clear. There was and is no evidence of it,..” – – – That is patently false. Someone here is either grossly ignorant of the facts (which several of us have explained here), or just plain dishonest.”———–Its abundently clear this was the case. I see quotes all of this baord of what the obama administration said. Obamas adminisrtation lied! Refute those, by actual response rather than claim you have. Because you haven’t! It is your response which is devoid of rational thought!

NENE: “Hey B-K, I see that you were on the Arkansas in 1982. How did you like that little “tap” that cost you the Battle E? I The problem with your narrative is that CGN -41 was back in Norfolk when the barracks bombing took place.” – - – OMG I was in forward IC when that happened! That was one of the first times I heard the GQ alarm for real. Going into the Gulf of Sidra were the others on that deployment. After which bombing? We were pulling into Naples when either the barracks or the embassy was blown up. My sea and anchor station was #1 throttleman. Our libety was held up for 4-6 hours while the admirals decided if they were going to send us straight to Beirut to provide NGFS and help with evacuations.

ROFL Like it really matters if I switched the embassy and barracks bombings when I conflated two different events and forgot to specify the embassy bombing when I was alredy discussing the barracks bomging. LOL Talk about petty partisan nitpicking over a detail from 30 years ago.

BK, there you go again with what can only be described as a self proclaimed ability to provide rational thought. You lecture on context yet can completely ignore the concept of probable cause/effect. I hope you are never in a position where a criminal act is perpetrated against you and your own because to be consistent and rational utilizing your own logic tree one can only bring forth for questioning one who it can be proven perpetrated the crime rather than one that had probable cause and is most likely to have perpetrated the crime. Short of confession there would be no justice and I would expect, given your stance, that you would be sufficiently satisfied with that. 4 Americans died….let’s hear your rational position on who is responsible for that happening or do you think it was unavoidable?

Yes B-K, we were there when the embassy was blown up the first time.
Apparently they didn’t need an ORSE superstar for that duty, so they sent you guys.

Don’t worry BEABEA: When this first happened, B-K spent about two days here trying to explain how Stevens himself was responsible because he had refused extra security in order to be closer to the Libyan people. WHOOPS! Wrong again! LOL! LOL! LOL! B-K was also “ROTFLHAS” that anyone could ever even think that an embassy could be defended against any armed group (especially if they had ladders) and also said that four lives were not even worth getting that upset over because, after all, Reagan had lost many, many more. He also said that this would blow over in a couple of days and that Obama would not be affected by it at all. HE’S A JOKE! Just like Obama!

Guess it all depends on what your definition of “is” is. Too bad Obama, doesn’t look like many people are buying your story this time. Might want to rethink your strategy………even your loyal drones aren’t going to be able to talk (or post) you out of this one!

Obama’s illegal invasion of Libya opened up a power vacuum in Benghazi that was filled with Al Qaeda operatives. The U.S. Consulate requested security assistance multiple times. They were denied by this administration. The result is four dead Americans and a massive cover up by this administration.

First, B-K Knightrider, your books are boring and very unconvincing….”Obama said the day after the first debate: “If someone wants to be president, then they owe the American people the truth.” Well then, Obama just disqualified himself for president many times over, obviously. Obama and his lackeys flat out lied about the attack in Libya — for a full WEEK. Why? Because they basically got an ambassador and several others killed through narcissistic negligence and incompetent indifference.”
Posted by: RIDLEY KNOWS
Yes, indeed. Apt and accurate ssummary

NOZ: “Why would a Terrorist, in the middle of an attack, radio or make a cell phone call to Al Qaeda to discuss when the attack started? Wouldn’t they discuss how the attack is going,” – - – Who said they didn’t mention any of those other things? The point of the article I read that quoted parts of the transcript from that intercept was ONLY to discuss what reasons or information there was out there that might have caused people to mistakenly believe there was a protest at the consulate. Therefore, the article only quoted the relevant parts of the transcript. Why? Because that statement implied: 1) there was a protest at the consulate (which there was, in the form of a well planned coordinated tactical assault of a fixed position) 2) the attack had some kind of a connection to the/a protest over the video. I don’t know if that transmission reported anything else and I don’t care because those details are irrelevent to if and how much that intercept contributed to misunderstandings over what happened at the consulate. So, can you say red herring?

REALITY CHECK: “Obama’s illegal invasion of Libya…” – - – ROFLMAO We did not “invade” Libya. As for our involvement in their civil war, prove that involvement was illegal. Please cite the exact language in the Constitution or federal law the explicitly forbids any specific action we took in Libya.

WHAT IS EXTREMELY DISCONCERTING to me is the number of ‘attacks’ by right wing trolls calling the President a liar – over 4 American deaths – and yet they ‘bristle’ when ‘W’ and Darth Vader are accused of the same thing when ‘billions of tax payer dollars were spent and HUNDREDS of thousand lives were lost in a war we should have NEVER fought. Now somehow….i just don’t think that these people have any ‘commonsense OR sense of perspective’ Their ‘blind hate’ for this President being that great. AND NO…I am NOT discounting those 4 Americans lives.

The mother of an American diplomat killed during a terrorist raid on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has hit out at Barack Obama for describing the attack as ‘not optimal’, saying: ‘My son is not very optimal – he is also very dead.’

During an interview shown on Comedy Central, Obama responded to a question about his administration’s confused communication after the assault by saying: ‘If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.’

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline today, Pat Smith, whose son Sean died in the raid, said: ‘It was a disrespectful thing to say and I don’t think it’s right.

‘How can you say somebody being killed is not very optimal? I don’t think the President has the right idea of the English language.’

“The mother of an American diplomat killed during a terrorist raid on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi has hit out at Barack Obama for describing the attack as ‘not optimal’, saying: ‘My son is not very optimal – he is also very dead.’

During an interview shown on Comedy Central, Obama responded to a question about his administration’s confused communication after the assault by saying: ‘If four Americans get killed, it’s not optimal.’

Speaking exclusively to MailOnline today, Pat Smith, whose son Sean died in the raid, said: ‘It was a disrespectful thing to say and I don’t think it’s right.

‘How can you say somebody being killed is not very optimal? I don’t think the President has the right idea of the English language.’” ——–odumbo and his clown crew couldn’t care less!

B-K, that sub was a Foxtrot But we actually picked up a November SSN and were supposed to follow-there had been no Soviet SSN in the Med up to that time. Most of the Soviet ships were at an anchorage near Crete-every few weeks we would go by-they never got underway.
Brought a lot of Lladros home from that deployment.

How could anyone vote for a person that had the power to prevent this but didn’t? And then, President Obama attempts to distort the truth and hide his leadership failures for weeks by either claiming his administration was still sorting through the information when asked if it was a terrorist attack on The View (Sept 25th), and later that day referencing the “video” 6 times in his UN speech. Horrible leadership again from Obama.

Obama’s response of our fallen Ambassador and 3 Security men being “Not optimal” was Callous.