Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(NBC News)   John McCain really took today's "storm relief rally" to heart....by spending his entire speech accusing Obama of a coverup in Libya   (firstread.nbcnews.com ) divider line
    More: Asinine, John McCain, obama, Libya, 2008 presidential candidate, stump speeches, GOP presidential, cover up, NBC News  
•       •       •

1186 clicks; posted to Politics » on 31 Oct 2012 at 5:04 AM (3 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



170 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-10-31 10:21:17 AM  

incendi: NateGrey: McCain could of

Yes, for all intensive purposes, he certainly could of.


lol in a thread full of grammar mistakes you pick that one? Good on you Mr Nazi!

SacriliciousBeerSwiller: mr lawson: "They" had access to a AC-130 gunship that was near by

What the hell do you think they could do with that? Open fire onto all the protesters, non-combatants and all? Or the consulate itself? What, you think it could just snipe the bad guys? Far from it. A gunship is worthless in the circumstances they faced.


As someone who has played four tours of Call of Duty, bad guys have a red box around them.

Dumb libs!
 
2012-10-31 10:22:14 AM  

GoodyearPimp: FirstNationalBastard: [i297.photobucket.com image 400x300]

Heh, I know that picture is fake. McCain can't raise his hand that high.


i865.photobucket.com
 
2012-10-31 10:23:09 AM  

Chummer45: I don't even understand it. The GOP is upset because, after four Americans were killed and the riots were over, the administration sent "mixed signals" regarding whether it was a terrorist attack or not?


They're upset because, all evidence to the contrary, this event makes it look like Obama is weak on defense. It's the very definition of confirmation bias. This is a president who assumed unilateral power to drone strike suspected terrorists anywhere on the globe, accepted the Nobel peace prize with a speech about the necessity of war, and invaded a sovereign nation in order to get Bin Laden. But during a riot some terrorists managed to kill four Americans, so Obama is weak.

If a conservative wants to believe that all apples are red, they'll just disregard all of the green ones until they spot a red one.

"See, I told you so! Apples are always red!"
 
2012-10-31 11:03:18 AM  

Gunther: Man, they're really hammering this Benghazi thing.

Obama needs to get on TV and say something like:

"Yes, four Americans died. We didn't have a realistic way of saving them given the limited knowledge we had at the time. And yes; we didn't know for certain why the mob killed them for several days. It's a tragedy, but not really an avoidable one - it's a violent part of the world right now, and the American government isn't well liked there. Embassy and consulate attacks are gonna happen. You can say "well, they should have had more guards then!", but a) What do you think a few more guards would have accomplished against a mob of 100's armed with AKs? and b) Why would you think a president has any direct input on something as obscure as the number of guards at a small consulate? This Monday morning quarterbacking shiat where you try to use the deaths of American servicemen for political ends is in really, really poor taste".


So much this. I have an extreme right-wing classmate on Facebook who continually posts about the "coverup" in Benghazi - I may have to borrow this to try and shut him up.
 
2012-10-31 11:04:09 AM  

Noam Chimpsky: I'm sure it rained in 1973 but the Democrats didn't drop the whole Watergate thing. No one died at Watergate.


No, but millions of Cambodian children died because of Watergate.
 
2012-10-31 11:05:50 AM  
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net
 
2012-10-31 11:13:24 AM  
I was going to engage some folks here on the Benghazi non-sense, but honestly, what's the point? Instead I'll just leave this here.

Spoiler Alert: There's a reason the mainstream media is not picking up the Benghazi story, and that reason is that the entire story is based on a handful of non-news media outlets printing speculation and rumor as fact without proper confirmation.
 
2012-10-31 11:54:24 AM  
Fark you, McCain. Your last four or so years are a perfect example of someone that doesn't know when to quit or shut up.

You have a good family, piles of cash, and more homes than you can keep track of. But instead of stepping out of the public eye to enjoy them in your final years you're going to continue on, making an ass out of yourself time and again until you die angry at the world because of the 2008 election results. As a result your legacy is going to be having unleashed Palin on the world and being a dick. Hope you're proud.
 
2012-10-31 11:57:01 AM  

lantawa: He's spot on with his assertion of what is happening with the Administration relative to Libya. Obvious statements are obvious to all but the most obstinate, obtuse, recalcitrant, and incorrigible partisan parasites.


FTFY.
 
2012-10-31 12:01:28 PM  

Gunther: t3knomanser: I'm still so confused by all of this. I'm apparently retarded, because I have no clue what the Republicans are going on about. Let me see if I can walk through the series of events and try and understand it.

A few Americans died in some country filled with scary brown people just before the election, therefore Obama must be impeached!

Honestly, they're well aware there's no scandal here, but if they can make a loud enough stink about it they'll put a dent in Obama's foreign policy reputation in the minds of the electorate. Most people won't look into it and just think "Man, Obama must have screwed up, he's catching so much flak over this!"


If there was more going on here, wouldn't Romney have had more ammo at the foreign policy debate than just 'he didn't use the word terror"?

Serious question
 
2012-10-31 12:07:42 PM  
So the magic negro is responsible for the attacks on 09/11/2012

but the honorable president Bush isn't responsible for the attacks on 09/11/2001

I think I understand now.
 
2012-10-31 12:21:16 PM  

mr lawson: Alphax: You're a damned liar.

What part?


Not to belabor a point, or call factcheck out, there is a lot of stuff there, but a Libyan representative in the UK told BBC news on September 12th that there was a protest about the video and this other group used it as an opportunity to attack the consulate. What we know now in hindsight and what we knew then, what was reported by different news agencies, the known knowns, unknown knowns and the unknown unknowns have changed over time.

We did not have investigators on the ground in the consulate until October. We had disparate sources of information, and making a coherent picture out of it seems to have been easier for some news organizations than others. I have a hard time seeing the conspiracy that others find so blatant. The battle seems to be about who was ready to call something something when. People were being arrested before some people called one thing or the other. I'm not sure it makes much difference what it was called if we were picking up the perps.

Anyway, I have limited page search capabilities on the iPad, but I don't see the drone video or the ac130 assertion on that page, not that I know they would have made a difference, especially with the timeline detailed there. It sounds like there was fighting at close quarters in 2 buildings. Any amount of large caliber or multidirectional ordinance seems like it might have gotten more of our own people killed. But I defer that judgement to the Internet colonels and secret agents.

Clearly it doesn't pay to be patient for all the facts to come out when there is so little time to make it into a semantic conspiracy before the election. If anyone should know that, it would be McCain. And we've only had to compromise our security and intelligence operations in Benghazi to make the appropriate amount of hay.
 
2012-10-31 12:26:10 PM  

Genevieve Marie: GAT_00: Genevieve Marie: Poor John McCain. I remember when he was considered reasonable by most people and well liked by both parties.

I'm not sure what happened to him.

I'm not quite sure why. He fought longer than anyone else to stop MLK Day. He's never been a good guy.

Huh. Something I did not know.

I think it's that his POW story is so horrible and so compelling. You want to root for someone that survived that. Also, I think there's the assumption that someone who's survived something like that has to have a special strength and resilience.

I just.... really don't care for that guy now.


He was saying some pretty reasonable things back when he ran. For a while after, too.

/McCain, I am disappoint.
 
2012-10-31 12:34:06 PM  

Gunther: Man, they're really hammering this Benghazi thing.
Obama needs to get on TV and say something like:
"Yes, four Americans died. We didn't have a realistic way of saving them given the limited knowledge we had at the time. And yes; we didn't know for certain why the mob killed them for several days. It's a tragedy, but not really an avoidable one - it's a violent part of the world right now, and the American government isn't well liked there. Embassy and consulate attacks are gonna happen. You can say "well, they should have had more guards then!", but a) What do you think a few more guards would have accomplished against a mob of 100's armed with AKs? and b) Why would you think a president has any direct input on something as obscure as the number of guards at a small consulate? This Monday morning quarterbacking shiat where you try to use the deaths of American servicemen for political ends is in really, really poor taste".


Obama just doesn't seem to be very good at defending himself. Unless he's snarking (and he's very good at that, which has just the effect you'd think on the people who hate him--they hate him more.) You'd think that after four years, he'd realize that this "rising above the fray" stuff just doesn't work with the retarded masses.

I'm not sure that anything else would either, and I'm sure he has some good people advising him, but he does seem to miss a lot of opportunities to set the record straight about things. Even easy things, that even the stupid could understand (if they wanted to)

Maybe he just doesn't care. Maybe he nurtures a hope that his countrymen can't possibly be so stupid that he needs to correct them on subjects like where he was born, or whether Osama is really dead. Or maybe he realizes that once the feeding frenzy starts, anything he says is just more fuel for the lies. 

I was married to a guy who could do that--take anything I said, no matter how innocent, and turn it into a lie and an example of how I was hiding something from him. He was a psychopath.
 
2012-10-31 12:45:06 PM  

Chummer45: Does anyone give a shiat about this "libya scandal" talking point?


Apparently the Republicans care a lot. It's almost as if Romney paid for the attack using money from his secret overseas bank accounts funneled to his friend Bibi. Of course Republicans have never done such a thing before, or have they? Iran Contra If Romney were to be elected he could then pardon the traitors, just Bush did for Iran Contra.
 
2012-10-31 12:50:17 PM  

NateGrey: lol in a thread full of grammar mistakes you pick that one? Good on you Mr Nazi!


It called to me. I just couldn't resist.
 
2012-10-31 01:20:20 PM  

LordJiro: ~40 Americans dead, the East coast is underwater, millions without power, a sizable chunk of America's largest city is devastated - Not worth talking about.

Four Americans who CHOSE to work in a very unstable part of the world die in an 'act of terror' (which somehow differs from a terrorist attack) - WORSE THAN FIFTY NINE ELEVENS!!11!11 despite the fact that many, if not most, of the people involved in the attack have been caught.

/Remind me how many American embassies and consulates were attacked during previous presidencies?


But Panetta and Obama didn't call in airstrikes on the area surrounding the embassy. I can't see how that one could have turned out badly, and I'm sure it's as simple as Obama is either incompetent or he really wanted more Americans to die. I'm sure an airstrike on an American embassy would have significantly reduced the death toll from 4 to 1 or 2, with no negative consequences whatsoever.
 
2012-10-31 04:38:09 PM  

Chummer45: What would you rather have - an administration that jumps to conclusions about what could be a complicated situation in a foreign country, or an administration that wants to figure out what actually happened before saying "terrorists did this!"


You're talking about a bunch who yell zOMG TERRAISTS! every time they hear a thunderclap.
 
2012-10-31 05:22:35 PM  

Mr. Coffee Nerves: See, if he had won this would NOT have been an issue.

He would have died from the stress -- or a "tragic accident" where he was mysteriously crushed under 281 bags of falling Husky Chow -- by mid-2009. Eventually a French newspaper would have printed a "Who Wore It Better" photo of President Palin and Carla Bruni wearing the same $5,000 pantsuit with the caption "Madame President...more than your poll numbers are sagging" and Sarah would have
nuked every French and Italian city, turning the Mediterranean into a radioactive swamp of death.

This bold act of leadership would not only have prevented Iran from reaching the sea via Syria, but would have rendered much of Libya uninhabitable due to fallout and radiation poisoning. Ergo, no Benghazi consulate attack.


I want to subscribe to your newsletter.
 
2012-11-01 02:12:46 AM  

thamike: timujin: Someone posted a list a while back of all of the attacks on U.S. facilities during the Bush administration. Some of which, if I remember the post correctly, ended in American casualties. Does anyone know what the fark I'm talking about or am I going to have to do actual research?

It might have been me:


Just U.S. embassies and consulates?

Bush: 5 embassies, 3 consulates, and the American Center in Kolkata. 50+ dead altogether.


It was, and thanks.
 
Displayed 20 of 170 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report