If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   Two US embassies attacked and the craven diplomatic response to it would seem to be the sort of thing that warrants New York Times front-page coverage, yes? Not if it crowds out a Romney hit-piece it's not   (nytimes.com) divider line 22
    More: Obvious, United States, CTU, embassy, Benjamin Netanyahu, warrants, State Senator Roy J. McDonald, military strike  
•       •       •

4133 clicks; posted to Politics » on 12 Sep 2012 at 10:19 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Funniest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-09-12 08:47:04 AM
7 votes:
NY Times headline for Armageddon: "WORLD ENDS: Women, Minorities Hardest Hit"
2012-09-12 12:34:00 PM
2 votes:

Tumunga: So, you're saying Romney should knowingly give you a line of bullshiat to make you feel better about this predictable continuation of the Obama approved "Arab Spring"?

Arab Spring libtards, Arab Spring! Plant your Obama daffodils now so they'll be a bloomin' when them A-rabs start murder bombing our Krogers.


Location: Indianapolis

At first I thought you were a troll, but then I realized you're just from Indiana.

It's cool man. You can hardly even notice the missing chromosomes. I'm sure no one notices.
2012-09-12 12:19:07 PM
2 votes:
I have Sunday's New Yorks Times print edition sitting on my coffee table, and I see those they haven't updated it yet with news about the attacks.

Like subby, I find newspapers almost as confusing as magnets. How the fark do they work?
2012-09-12 11:18:17 AM
2 votes:
Dear People Younger Than 25,

A "newspaper" is a relic of the old world that is printed and then becomes unchangeable. It's sort of like a blog, only with yesterday's news, and more papery.
2012-09-12 10:28:40 AM
2 votes:

Kazan: fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.


I wonder if you'll feel the same about voting for a Mormon?
2012-09-12 10:27:35 AM
2 votes:

skinnycatullus: Gulper Eel: With some blubbering about abusing the freedom of speech.

That statement was issued before any attack took place, so I'm not sure how that can reasonably be considered a response to the attacks.


Romney would have retroactively condemned the attacks before they happened.
2012-09-12 01:25:59 PM
1 votes:

Jake Havechek: It was a bunch of yahoos and hooligans, how do you declare war on them?



Ask Pussy Riot
2012-09-12 01:24:32 PM
1 votes:
Romney has not backed off the response - "It's never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values," he said Wednesday - but his campaign faces a near consensus in Republican foreign policy circles that, whatever the sentiment, Romney faltered badly.

"It's deeply unfortunate when the circumstance of the statement becomes the story," said Rick Perry's former foreign policy adviser, Victoria Coates, who is now an adjunct fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, and who suggested that Romney should simply have "gone earlier rather than save it for midnight" to avoid appearing to play politics on September 11. "It's unfortunate that it's playing out this way, and hopefully they can get back on message, because their point is sound," she said.

Other conservatives were less sympathetic.

"It's bad," said a former aide to Senator John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign. "Just on a factual level that the statement was not a response but preceding, or one could make the case precipitating. And just calling it a 'disgrace' doesn't really cut it. Not ready for prime time."

A third Republican, a former Bush State Department official, told BuzzFeed, "It wasn't presidential of Romney to go political immediately - a tragedy of this magnitude should be something the nation collectively grieves before politics enters the conversation."



"They were just trying to score a cheap news cycle hit based on the embassy statement and now it's just completely blown up," said a very senior Republican foreign policy hand, who called the statement an "utter disaster" and a "Lehman moment" - a parallel to the moment when John McCain, amid the 2008 financial crisis, failed to come across as a steady leader. 


s3.amazonaws.com
LULZ!!!1111 I trolled the Fartbongo!1111ONEZ
2012-09-12 12:56:35 PM
1 votes:

InmanRoshi: Farkin Christ, the Republican infatuation with Jimmy Carter will never cease to amaze me. Democrats/Obama aren't supposed to bring up the utter disaster left behind by an utter disaster of a President from 3 years ago, but Republicans get to shoehorn in the name of a President from over 30 years ago into every situation no matter how irrelevant.


And then how Saint Reagan descended from Heaven and saved America from the communists and hippies.
2012-09-12 12:53:35 PM
1 votes:

Wicked Chinchilla: Jake Havechek: Tumunga: Bocasio: The Republicans want to frame whats happened in Iran in 1979
With what happened last night

This is epic manipulation

Comparing Obama to Carter? I see it. If you don't see it, you're blind.

Yeah, but the GOP always conveniently forgets the CIA led coup that installed the Shah, and made the 1079 hostage crisis possible.

You dropped the 9 you mongoloid :)

Yes, the GOP does forget that. They also forget Reagan paid for those hostages with weapons.


Whatever, you think I believe in a fact from 30 years ago? I don't even believe in facts from 3 minutes ago.
2012-09-12 11:56:21 AM
1 votes:
Fark is going to shiat.

DIAF, tardmitter.
2012-09-12 11:52:23 AM
1 votes:
dronewarsuk.files.wordpress.com
Suck my dick
2012-09-12 10:52:13 AM
1 votes:

HotIgneous Intruder: Moopy Mac: /And there is no such thing as Xe anymore.

Yeah. Changed its name again, no doubt.

/Only an apologist would know something like that. Or care.


Academi

/not an apologist
2012-09-12 10:42:47 AM
1 votes:

hammettman: Moopy Mac: Am I missing something?

"U.S Envoy to Libya Is Killed in Attack" is the top story on the front page.

NY Times front page

Tardmitter is using the printed front page, which was printed before the events happened.

Time/space continuum, how does it work?


Really, when you think about it, this is Obama's fault for not lending the NY Times his time machine. Of course if Romney was President they would be able to retroactively file to have their print edition front page recorded as showing coverage of the Ambassador's killing.
2012-09-12 10:38:58 AM
1 votes:

Gulper Eel: cryinoutloud: There's nothing that makes us stronger against the extremists than fighting among ourselves.

Yeah, mobthink is far more effective.


You're deriving psychological pleasure from a childish attempt to wind people up about the death of a US envoy. Doesn't it ever cross your mind to be a little less selfish than useful when something bad happens?
2012-09-12 10:31:48 AM
1 votes:
Why can't the media take it's cues from Breitbart? Why?
2012-09-12 10:28:34 AM
1 votes:

vernonFL: Cairo and Benghazi


Cairo and Benghazi, when the walls fell.

Cairo and Benghazi, their flags ashes.
2012-09-12 10:27:23 AM
1 votes:

Kazan: fark you farking muslim extremists, and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Muhammad.


This could be Mad Fark Libs.

fark you farking Mormon extremists and fark your pedophile raider 'prophet' Joseph Smith.
2012-09-12 09:40:03 AM
1 votes:
Holy shiate, the two embassy attacks didn't even make the NY Times front page? Even MSNBC is blushing at that.
2012-09-12 09:38:18 AM
1 votes:
Two US embassies attacked and the craven diplomatic response to it would seem to be the sort of thing that warrants New York Times front-page coverage, yes?

Negative NYT Press for Democrats? Subby must have been born yesterday.
2012-09-12 09:27:25 AM
1 votes:

Gulper Eel: The White House is disavowing the embassy's Weenerss


Geez, is Bill Swerski handling the filterpwnage these days?
2012-09-12 08:58:44 AM
1 votes:

skinnycatullus: the craven diplomatic response to it

I'm confused about what this is supposed to mean. The only official response I've seen has been condemnation.


No, you see, the right thing to do would be to start bombing before even releasing a statement. Otherwise you're just encouraging the savages to attack us further.
 
Displayed 22 of 22 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report