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.

(Yahoo)   Obama takes McCain and Graham to the woodshed on live television   (news.yahoo.com) divider line 133
    More: Cool, John McCain, obama, fair hearings, Susan Rice, East Room, confirmation, Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton  
•       •       •

6831 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Nov 2012 at 4:15 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



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


Archived thread
2012-11-14 04:25:33 PM
8 votes:
Republicans are more interested in turning their ire for the Benghazi attack on our own people than on the people who did it.

Says a lot...
2012-11-14 04:31:09 PM
5 votes:
3.bp.blogspot.com
2012-11-14 04:26:31 PM
5 votes:
Note that neither of their responses mentioned Susan Rice and instead went after the President. Looks like they got the message.
2012-11-14 05:24:44 PM
4 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: Ok I think it's obvious that bradkanus has no clue how the "president lied to us" even though he says it's true. He has just been told by Hot Air and other Republican sources that also told us Romney was going to win in a landslide so I am not going to stay here and harp on him, because it's obvious he is regurgitating talking points that he doesn't have any facts to support.

Okay - I'll turn the table. What is the Presdient's official "excuse" for the attacks. What exactly does he say happened. REmember - he had no idea what was going on September 12th. However today admitted they were "watching" the attack and couldn't clearly see the severity of the fighting going on.

So, since I'm a failure here, please educate me on the President's official position on the entire attack. I need to know obviously. Do not put links - I want quotes - the standard you request of me.


Thank you for that admission.

And, before reading this, remember that the violence wasn't only in Benghazi.

September 12 -- President Barack Obama:

"The United States condemns in the strongest terms this outrageous and shocking attack. ... No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation."

September 12 -- Secretary of State Hillary Clinton:
"We are working to determine the precise motivations and methods of those who carried out this assault. Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior, along with the protest that took place at our embassy in Cairo yesterday, as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. America's commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is no justification for this; none."

September 12 -- White House spokesman Jay Carney, in response to questions about whether the attack was planned:

"It's too early for us to make that judgment. I think -- I know that this is being investigated, and we're working with the Libyan government to investigate the incident. So I would not want to speculate on that at this time."

September 12 -- Obama, at a campaign event in Las Vegas, again uses the "act of terror" line:

"No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America."

He repeats the line again the next day in Golden, Colorado. "I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished."

September 13 -- Jay Carney:

"The protests we're seeing around the region are in reaction to this movie. They are not directly in reaction to any policy of the United States or the government of the United States or the people of the United States."

September 13 -- A senior U.S. official tells CNN that the Benghazi violence was a "clearly planned attack":

"It was not an innocent mob," the official said. "The video or 9/11 made a handy excuse and could be fortuitous from their perspective, but this was a clearly planned military-type attack."

September 13 -- State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland:

"Well, as we said yesterday when we were on background, we are very cautious about drawing any conclusions with regard to who the perpetrators were, what their motivations were, whether it was premeditated, whether they had any external contacts, whether there was any link, until we have a chance to investigate along with the Libyans. So I know that's going to be frustrating for you, but we really want to make sure that we do this right and we don't jump to conclusions. That said, obviously, there are plenty of people around the region citing this disgusting video as something that has been motivating."

September 14 -- Jay Carney:

"We were not aware of any actionable intelligence indicating that an attack on the U.S. mission in Benghazi was planned or imminent."

September 16 -- Susan Rice, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, on CNN's "State of the Union" with Candy Crowley:

"There was a hateful video that was disseminated on the Internet. It had nothing to do with the United States government, and it's one that we find disgusting and reprehensible. It's been offensive to many, many people around the world. That sparked violence in various parts of the world, including violence directed against Western facilities including our embassies and consulates."

On CBS' "Face the Nation," Rice also said that, "We do not have information at present that leads us to conclude that this was premeditated or preplanned."

September 18 -- Jay Carney:

"Our belief, based on the information we have, is it was the video that caused the unrest in Cairo, and the video and the unrest in Cairo that helped -- that precipitated some of the unrest in Benghazi and elsewhere. What other factors were involved is a matter of investigation."

September 19 -- Jay Carney:

"It is a simple fact that there are, in post-revolution, postwar Libya, armed groups, there are bad actors hostile to the government, hostile to the West, hostile to the United States. And as has been the case in other countries in the region, it is certainly conceivable that these groups take advantage of and exploit situations that develop, when they develop, to protest against or attack either Westerners, Americans, Western sites or American sites. ... Right now I'm saying we don't have evidence at this point that this was premeditated or preplanned to coincide on a -- to happen on a specific date or coincide with that anniversary."

September 19 -- Matthew Olson, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, responding to a question by Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairman Joe Lieberman on whether the attack was a terrorist attack:

"They were killed in the course of a terrorist attack on our embassy. ... At this point, what I would say is that a number of different elements appear to have been involved in the attack, including individuals connected to militant groups that are prevalent in eastern Libya, particularly the Benghazi area, as well we are looking at indications that individuals involved in the attack may have had connections to al Qaeda or al Qaeda affiliates, in particular al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb." Olson also said U.S. officials had no "specific evidence of significant advanced planning."

September 20 -- Jay Carney:

"It is, I think, self-evident that what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack. Our embassy was attacked violently, and the result was four deaths of American officials."

September 20 -- President Obama at a town hall meeting organized by the Spanish-language Univision Network, responding to a question about the possible involvement of al Qaeda:

"What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests."

September 21 -- Hillary Clinton:

"What happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack, and we will not rest until we have tracked down and brought to justice the terrorists who murdered four Americans."

September 25 -- President Obama on ABC's "The View," in response to interviewer Joy Behar's question, "I heard Hillary Clinton say it was an act of terrorism. Is it? What do you say?":

"We're still doing an investigation. There's no doubt that (with) the kind of weapons that were used, the ongoing assault, that it wasn't just a mob action. We don't have all the information yet, so we're still gathering it. But what's clear is that around the world, there's still a lot of threats out there." Obama also said "extremist militias" were suspected to have been involved.

September 26 -- Hillary Clinton:

"What is happening inside Mali is augmented by the rising threat from violent extremism across the region. For some time, al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and other groups have launched attacks and kidnappings from northern Mali into neighboring countries. Now, with a larger safe haven and increased freedom to maneuver, terrorists are seeking to extend their reach and their networks in multiple directions. And they are working with other violent extremists to undermine the democratic transitions under way in North Africa, as we tragically saw in Benghazi."

September 27 -- Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta:

"It was a terrorist attack. ... As we determined the details of what took place there and how that attack took place, it became clear that there were terrorists who had planned that attack."

September 27 -- A senior U.S. official tells CNN that it became clear within about a day of the Benghazi attack that it been the work of terrorists.

Separately, CNN National Security Analyst Fran Townsend reports that a law enforcement source told her that "from day one, we had known clearly that this was a terrorist attack."

September 28 -- Statement by Shawn Turner, spokesman for Director of National Intelligence James Clapper:

"In the immediate aftermath, there was information that led us to assess that the attack began spontaneously following protests earlier that day at our embassy in Cairo. We provided that initial assessment to executive branch officials and members of Congress, who used that information to discuss the attack publicly and provide updates as they became available. Throughout our investigation, we continued to emphasize that information gathered was preliminary and evolving. As we learned more about the attack, we revised our initial assessment to reflect new information indicating that it was a deliberate and organized terrorist attack carried out by extremists."

October 1 -- Nuland, in response to calls from Rep. Peter King, R-California, for Rice to resign because her remarks about the attack were, according to him, misleading:

"Well, let me start by saying that Secretary Clinton believes that Ambassador Rice has done a superb job. So let's just start there, and we completely reject any such calls here in this building."

October 1 -- Nuland, responding to a question about whether officials in Libya had sought additional security for diplomatic installations and personnel there:

"I think it's fair to say that we are still working through what we have in this building in terms of documentation, in terms of information about what we knew, who knew it, when they knew it, and that's part of the process that we have to go through."

October 2 -- Carney:

"I can tell you that from the moment our facility was attacked in Benghazi, the president's focus has been on securing our diplomats and facilities in Libya and around the world, and on bringing the killers to justice. At every step of the way, the administration has based its public statements on the best assessments that were provided by the intelligence community. As the intelligence community learned more information, they updated Congress and the American people on it."

October 9 -- During a background briefing with reporters, a senior State Department official responding to a question about whether the attack was a spontaneous assault taking advantage of a demonstration over the movie:

"That is a question that you would have to ask, have to ask others. That was not, that was not our conclusion. I'm not saying that we had a conclusion."

The background briefing contains detailed information about the attack, including how dozens of armed men stormed the complex as Stevens and two security team members took refuge in a fortified room.

"The lethality and the number of armed people is unprecedented," one official said. "There had been no attacks like that anywhere in Libya -- Tripoli, Benghazi or anywhere -- in the time that we had been there. And so it is unprecedented, in fact, it would be very, very hard to find precedent for an attack like (it) in recent diplomatic history."

October 9 -- Clapper, during a speech in Orlando:

Upon returning from a trip to Australia, Clapper said, he was "reading the media clips about the hapless, hopeless, helpless, inept, incompetent DNI, because I acknowledged publicly that we didn't instantly have that 'God's eye, God's ear' certitude" about what had happened.

He later added, in answer to a question: "The challenge is always a tactical warning, the exact insights ahead of time that such an attack is going to take place, and obviously we did not have that. This gets into the mysteries versus secrets thing. If people don't behave, emit a behavior or talk or something else ahead of time to be detected, it's going to be very hard to predict an exact attack and come up with an exact attack."

October 10 -- Under Secretary of State for Management Pat Kennedy, in congressional testimony:

"No one in the administration has claimed to know all the answers. We have always made clear that we are giving the best information we have at the time, and that information has evolved."

In the same hearing, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs Charlene Lamb testified that the State Department "had the correct number of assets in Benghazi at the time."

October 10 -- Obama, in an ABC interview:

"The information may not have always been right the first time. And as soon as it turns out that we have a fuller picture of what happened, then that was disclosed."

October 10 -- Carney, responding to questions about whether administration officials had misled the public because they did not want to acknowledge a terrorist attack:

"The president of the United States referred to it as an act of terror immediately after it occurred."

"I never said we don't know if it's terrorism. There was an issue about the definition of terrorism. This is by definition an act of terror, as the president made clear."

October 11 -- Vice President Joe Biden, during his debate with GOP vice presidential candidate Paul Ryan, responding to a question about what the administration knew about security requests from Libya:

"We weren't told they wanted more security there."

October 12 -- Carney, asked to respond to Biden's comments:

"The vice president was speaking about himself, and the president and the White House. He was not referring to the administration, clearly, since there was a public hearing for four and a half hours where it was discussed openly by individuals working at the State Department requests that were made."

October 15 -- Clinton, in an interview with CNN:

"I take responsibility. I'm in charge of the State Department's 60,000-plus people all over the world, 275 posts. The president and the vice president wouldn't be knowledgeable about specific decisions that are made by security professionals. They're the ones who weigh all of the threats and the risks and the needs and make a considered decision."

October 16 -- Obama, speaking to GOP challenger Mitt Romney at their second debate:

"The day after the attack, governor, I stood in the Rose Garden and I told the American people in the world that we are going to find out exactly what happened; that this was an act of terror. And I also said that we're going to hunt down those who committed this crime."
2012-11-14 05:17:14 PM
4 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


Normally I ignore you, because it's easier on my blood pressure, but you need some straightening out, for Corvus's sake if nothing else. I'm sure you won't pay attention, but try this on for size.

A changing story is not the same thing as a lie. Changing stories occur when the initial report is found to be based on incorrect or partial facts, which are later found to be wrong, or which are filled in with more facts as an evolving story unfolds. A "lie" is a total fabrication or untruth told with malice or intent to deceive on the part of the teller, usually for profit or other ulterior motive.

So in this case, the initial reports coming out of Benghazi were fragmented and indicated a terrorist attack; then later reports indicated it was a spontaneous attack following a protest about the video; then finally it appeared that the terrorists themselves staged the protest as a cover for a planned assault on the consulate. None of those are untrue; they are updates to an evolving story that are CHANGED as new facts become available.

A LIE, you see, is telling people something you know to be untrue or unverified by facts. Something like "We know there are WMDs in Baghdad." Now if a President were to assert something like that live on TV, that would be a lie. And if he insisted it was still true later, because he was too embarrassed to admit he was wrong, it would still be a lie. Not a "changing story."
2012-11-14 04:56:52 PM
4 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.

Sorry:

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

Can't you even do this?

You don't even know what you are talking about. Show me the quote not give me more BS links. You are repeating talking points you haven't even checked.

The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.


SO GIVE US THE EXACT QUOTE WERE HE LIED THEN?

I have asked you this multiple times already and so far you are unable to do it. Obviously you have no idea what you are talking about and are just repeating talking points.
2012-11-14 04:29:18 PM
4 votes:
I wish the has-been shell of a once-decent man that is McCain would just STFU - about everything from now on. Every time I hear him speak I can only think "thanks a bunch for foisting that loathsome hillbilly and her spawn on America, asshole".
2012-11-14 04:23:26 PM
4 votes:
These next 4 years could be a lot of fun.
2012-11-14 04:18:07 PM
4 votes:
at first I was like, don't get to cocky.

but them I'm all like, you know what? fark 'um. they decided to fark over america so Obama would be a one term president, now that he won in a landslide, treat them like your biatch Barack!
2012-11-14 04:02:59 PM
4 votes:

bradkanus: if "taking them to the woodshed" means "asking someone to blame me for someone else's mistake and requesting a chat about it" then I've been wrong about that phrase for a while.

I thought the president did a good job of taking the blame instead of shirking it. He simply asked that the critics go after him, not her. I don't see how that is bad for McCain and Graham - they got the president to recognize their shenanigans on national TV bringing more wood to an already raging fire.

Subby obviously didn't watch the press conference.


He told them to shut their cake hole on Benghazzi/Rice. If they do, they were taken to the woodshed. If they don't, he will take them to the woodshed.

Subby might be premature but the woodshed is in play.
2012-11-14 07:14:21 PM
3 votes:

More_Like_A_Stain: bradkanus: We now know that Rice lied - for sure 100 percent lied.

[i43.photobucket.com image 500x271]


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

Rice: "The problem here is that there will always be some uncertainty about how quickly he can acquire nuclear weapons, but we don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud."

Rice: "When people ask whether Iraq is a part of the war on terror, well, of course. Not only did Saddam support terrorists, not only was he a weapons of mass destruction threat and all of those things, but he was a tremendous barrier to change in the Middle East."

www.realnews247.com
2012-11-14 06:34:23 PM
3 votes:
The thing I don't understand about this "Obama lied about Benghazi!" thing is I don't get how the supposed lie helps Obama at all. I mean, as far as I can tell, the insinuation is that the Obama administration lied and said Benghazi was a random act of violence in the midst of widespread protests, when in reality Benghazi was a pre-planned act of violence in the midst of widespread protests.

Uh...so?

Or is the lie supposed to be that these Muslim zealots were upset about a specific video, when in reality these Muslim zealots were just pissed about all the things Muslim zealots are generally pissed about?

I just don't get what the fark these right wingnuts think the motivation for the "conspiracy" was. I don't see what Obama gets out of this either way.
2012-11-14 05:25:52 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: REmember - he had no idea what was going on September 12th. However today admitted they were "watching" the attack and couldn't clearly see the severity of the fighting going on.


So on the 12th, they didn't know exactly what was going on in an attack that they couldn't clearly see.

THE HORROR!!!

This truly is a national scandal.
2012-11-14 05:12:24 PM
3 votes:

More_Like_A_Stain: bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601

How about a quote? Feel free to pull it from any of the links that you've provided. Or any other really. You don't even have to get fancy and turn the quote into a link. Just post a quote.


It's funny how they thing many right wingers repeating something makes it true.

Then reality like the election hits.
2012-11-14 05:06:30 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: who is "they" when they said Romney was going to win, and what does that have to do with me? I live in Virginia - I could see it was over for Romney in September. You obvioulsy watch way too much Fox and get your news form Drudge, because nobody I read had Romney winning at all.


Well the site you just linked DID!!!!!


Michael Barone's prediction: Romney 315, Obama 223


So which is it? Are they trustworthy or not?
2012-11-14 05:00:57 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?

Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.

You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Just let me know if you can't read and I'll leave you alone. I mean, you have a guy who is claiming credit for all of his employees fark ups today and therefore admitting he is the source of them and now you don't want to let him own his mistakes.

If you're that dumb, I can't help you.


Why can't you cut and paste the exact quotes you are talking about instead of giving us links to talking points?


DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT KNOW OF THESE QUOTES YOU ARE REFERRING TO?


Why can't you quote them? Why can't you make you own argument? Why do you need others to think for you?
2012-11-14 04:59:33 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.


How are we supposed to discuss this matter if you don't even know the quotes you are talking about?
2012-11-14 04:51:20 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.


Sorry:

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

Can't you even do this?

You don't even know what you are talking about. Show me the quote not give me more BS links. You are repeating talking points you haven't even checked.
2012-11-14 04:44:01 PM
3 votes:
Seeing Republicans be all "the pres LIED" is pathetic. They are all pathetic traitors licking the boots of the wealthy. Secede already you traitorous scum. Real Americans don't want your old, pastey asses here anyway.
2012-11-14 04:41:33 PM
3 votes:
Do Republicans realize how desperate and pathetic the come off as? It sickens true blooded patriots to see cowardly traitors try to undermine Our President.
2012-11-14 04:34:52 PM
3 votes:
These people are going batshiat crazy over four Americans killed in the aftermath of the liberation of Libya from Gaddafi.That's a dictator overthrown and four American deaths. Where were they when we were losing that many per day in Iraq and Afghanistan. Oh right, they were cheering. That should tell you all you need to know about where their loyalties lie.
2012-11-14 04:32:41 PM
3 votes:

culebra: Second Term Barack gives no quarter. Noted.


This could get real interesting if Obama spends the next 4 years with the restrictor plates off. It will be wonderfully entertaining if "playing-it-safe-trying-to-get-re elected" Obama is dead and "fark-you-I-Have-political-capital" Obama is the new normal.
2012-11-14 04:30:17 PM
3 votes:
"Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack," Graham said in a statement released by his office.

So Mr. Graham is now fully admitting that Obama is completely and totally responsible for killing Bin Laden, right?
2012-11-14 04:28:50 PM
3 votes:
You know what's funny. So many Republicans are going "They lied! They Lied" but then when you ask them to give you the actual statements they can't. This thing is complete manufactured GOP BS..
2012-11-14 04:26:55 PM
3 votes:

bradkanus: if "taking them to the woodshed" means "asking someone to blame me for someone else's mistake and requesting a chat about it" then I've been wrong about that phrase for a while


Sorry what mistake did she make actually?

"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 the wake of the revolution in Libya are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there," she told ABC.


Isn't that what happened?
2012-11-14 04:26:34 PM
3 votes:
Second Term Barack gives no quarter. Noted.
2012-11-14 06:36:23 PM
2 votes:

freetomato: addy2: BMulligan: freetomato: I wish the has-been shell of a once-decent man that is McCain would just STFU - about everything from now on. Every time I hear him speak I can only think "thanks a bunch for foisting that loathsome hillbilly and her spawn on America, asshole".

I can always tell in threads such as this one who is too young to remember the Keating Five. McCain has always demonstrated rather flexible ethics.

Thank you. I tend to forget that myself.

I freely admit that in '89 I didn't pay attention to politics. I was too worried about the next concert or party. He's been a POS for a long time, I see. I still wish the crotchety, bitter, irrelevant sore loser would just STFU already.


Thud McCain lost me when he rolled over like a puppy for George W. Bush in 2000. For cripes sake, he was born in 1936.
Lindsey Graham is just another gay cracker from the Palmetto State, the original crucible of all things assinine, peevish, and butt hurt.
Fark 'em both sideways.
2012-11-14 06:24:18 PM
2 votes:

Felgraf: bikerific: It is pretty gutsy to bring up Rice on the offensive like this.

The safe, non-controversial course of action would have been to just quietly not bring Rice up as potential nominee for anything. They knew that bringing her up would provide a venue for attacks regarding Benghazi, and they are are taking it head-on.

I think they are basically daring the republicans to impeach Obama. Heck, they may want the republicans to do it, to try.

I admit I kind of want to see them try, too. Obama would CRUSH them in the media.


Boehner and Co. have to know that an impeachment vote would kill the Republican party forever. They are at least smart enough to realize that elections are won by winning over independents and moderates, and their fringe is too loud, too crass and too racist for the mainstream Republicans to keep quiet. The minute they start talking about impeachment, the rednecks will start posting the following on Facebook: "Finally that N_____ gets his rope" and "We're having an old-fashioned lynching, boys!" and it's over. The idiot brigade becomes the most visible face of the Republican Party and the independents, the moderates, the young and any minorities are digusted with the Right for life.

And, after pandering to those cocksuckers for almost 50 years, I can't think of a political party that deserves that more.
2012-11-14 06:21:32 PM
2 votes:

jigger: [i18.photobucket.com image 480x480]

You all keep posting this picture, but to me it says a few things.

Why the hell aren't US embassies in hostile countries more secure? Jeez.

Republicans aren't going to call for investigations into a Republican administration, DUH.

Democrats didn't seem to care enough to call for investigations into any of these attacks.


Because there is nothing to "investigate". As a major nation, we maintain diplomatic missions in a lot of dangerous places. It isn't always a safe job - any more than the military is. Our country sometimes is attacked by it's enemies. And as far a "security" - are you under the impression that we can move any amount of military personnel and/or ordnance into other people's countries to protect our embassies? We can't. That's why there were no "investigations". This is being done for political reasons - not because Congress intends or is able to mount any meaningful "investigation" of this matter.
Now, maybe we shouldn't maintain diplomatic missions on dangerous places - but that would require a major revamping of our foreign policy, and probably wouldn't be a good idea.
And as long as we do, and there are bad people in the world, bad things will happen from time to time.
The picture only illustrates the truth - that the current crop of Republicans are only making an issue of this because it happened on Obama's watch, and their faux outrage is faux.
2012-11-14 05:57:42 PM
2 votes:

Gyrfalcon: And I still can't understand why that's got so many people up in arms.


Well, you see, there was this press conference that ended with a photo of an embarrassing smirk. It kind of gave the impression that someone was trying to make political points over the death of four Americans, and that would be bad. So this whole thing was ginned up on the spur of the moment to try to distract from that embarrassing photo. But then it took on a life of it's own and grew a bit too large, just a bit too quickly. And now it just can't be reined in anymore. Whoopsie!
2012-11-14 05:56:10 PM
2 votes:
You people are arguing about how many angels you can fit on the head of a pin.
I'll only type this once:
What happened at Benghazi was an CIA joint.
As such, none of us small people will ever know what happened because 1) It's secret, and 2) It's secret because revealing details would reveal CIA tactical and operational details that are ... secret.
Somebody screwed up, but this was a screw-up along the lines of the Blackhawk helicopter shootdowns in Somalia. Things happen when you're at play in the fields of the lord.
All of the adults in charge understand this.
Now, Senators John "Thud! Did I Crash Another Navy Jet?!" McCain and Lindsey "Nope, Not Gay!" Graham (America's top Air Force reserve tactical lawyer and rug buyer) are on a warpath because they think they can. They've obviously forgotten that they;re now in the senate minority by quite a margin.
Obviously they're angling for impeachment, or just to raise a stinky stink.
Life will go on.

Let BENGHAZI! be the clarion call of the part of losers.
We'll all get tee shirts. Girls will wear the word emblazoned across their short shorts.
Life will go on.
2012-11-14 05:50:36 PM
2 votes:
I love how this whole thing has come down to: The White House knew it was a terrorist attack BUT THEY DIDN'T TELL US! That means THEY LIED!!!

Everything else is secondary to that one fact. HE KNEW BUT DIDN'T SAY SO!! And I still can't understand why that's got so many people up in arms. So what if the President knew on 9/12 that it was an actual terrorist attack? Why does it make any difference whether the official report blamed a terrorist group that day or a week later? Nobody--not here and not in the real world--has come up with any rational reason why it makes the slightest difference that that information was delayed a few days. Whether it was for confirmation or because initial reports were garbled--what possible difference does it make to anyone here in America?

Withholding information is not a lie. And in this case, it's not even a material omission of fact. Once it was confirmed, we knew it was a terrorist attack, we knew which group was responsible, and we knew when they got caught. Why does it matter which day we got informed? Maybe someday, someone will be able to tell me why it's so goddamn important and such an impeachable offense that the President wasn't making a pronouncement on 9/12 that it was eville terr'ists; but for now, it's just dumb.
2012-11-14 05:38:35 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: The embassy even asked for troops in response to threats - were denied.



Troops were sent from Tripoli. Glen Doherty, one of the guys who died, was sent from Tripoli.
2012-11-14 05:37:27 PM
2 votes:

Apocalyptic Inferno: Someone should be held accountable for this lapse.

Mixed messages definitely came out of the administration with Rice claiming the attacks resulted from a spontaneous protest. I don't have any problem with the way the actual attack was handled, but failure definitely occurred prior to it with security and after it with communication.


Like when Condi Rice was held accountable for that Bin Laden memo? Or when the Bush Administration invaded a country because of bad intelligence?
2012-11-14 05:33:51 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: but the guy lied to YOU


No he didn't.

bradkanus: wrong dipshiat - the president admitted today that they were watching the fight as it unfolded. Information wasn't "sketchy" - they watch it all on TV! They also had mulitple intel reports of action against the embassy in the days before the attack. The embassy even asked for troops in response to threats - were denied. The president KNEW. He lied about not knowing and admitted that today on TV. Although that was established weeks ago.


Poor poor Brad... You're desperate to find fault in the President. The eagerness with which regurgitate propaganda and bullshiat is exceeded only by your inability to perceive reality. Face it... you believe what you believe because you want to believe it... not because your position is supported by anything resembling fact.
2012-11-14 05:33:50 PM
2 votes:
This is far too much effort for a cut & paste troll, y'alls.

The epic meltdown and very public failure of the right wing media they use as a surrogate for thinking means we don't need to entertain them any more. They can't even pretend to have credibility, and their entire world view plods along only because they're victims of the sunk-cost fallacy.
2012-11-14 05:29:19 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: thanks for playing - you walked right into it.


Ah, the old debate tactic of pretending all went exactly as planned after you fail miserably to prove anything.

Farking tool.
2012-11-14 05:25:33 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-st ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


I've been following along and been entertained by your floundering, but seriously, the freep as a news source? It's noticeably less reliable than WND. You really need to step up your game, we expect a better breed of lunatic here.

Cheers

// Canadian so libbyist lib and all that
2012-11-14 05:25:03 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: So, since I'm a failure here,


Finally! Something we can all agree on.

bradkanus: Do not put links - I want quotes - the standard you request of me.


The standard that you have yet to meet.
2012-11-14 05:23:44 PM
2 votes:

Corvus: bradkanus: Corvus: Ok I think it's obvious that bradkanus has no clue how the "president lied to us" even though he says it's true. He has just been told by Hot Air and other Republican sources that also told us Romney was going to win in a landslide so I am not going to stay here and harp on him, because it's obvious he is regurgitating talking points that he doesn't have any facts to support.

Okay - I'll turn the table. What is the Presdient's official "excuse" for the attacks. What exactly does he say happened. REmember - he had no idea what was going on September 12th. However today admitted they were "watching" the attack and couldn't clearly see the severity of the fighting going on.

So, since I'm a failure here, please educate me on the President's official position on the entire attack. I need to know obviously. Do not put links - I want quotes - the standard you request of me.

I am not making an allegation you are. You told us the president is lying.

Are you now going to go back from that?


Sounds like it; he's now evading from proving that the President is lying by trying to turn the tables.

Pa. the. tic. He needs to go back to the usual suspects; they seemed to have a better grasp on this than he does.
2012-11-14 05:21:47 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: Ok I think it's obvious that bradkanus has no clue how the "president lied to us" even though he says it's true. He has just been told by Hot Air and other Republican sources that also told us Romney was going to win in a landslide so I am not going to stay here and harp on him, because it's obvious he is regurgitating talking points that he doesn't have any facts to support.

Okay - I'll turn the table. What is the Presdient's official "excuse" for the attacks. What exactly does he say happened. REmember - he had no idea what was going on September 12th. However today admitted they were "watching" the attack and couldn't clearly see the severity of the fighting going on.

So, since I'm a failure here, please educate me on the President's official position on the entire attack. I need to know obviously. Do not put links - I want quotes - the standard you request of me.


I am not making an allegation you are. You told us the president is lying.

Are you now going to go back from that?
2012-11-14 05:19:25 PM
2 votes:

Gyrfalcon: Normally I ignore you, because it's easier on my blood pressure, but you need some straightening out, for Corvus's sake if nothing else. I'm sure you won't pay attention, but try this on for size.


Don't let these guys get you mad. make fun of them as you show everyone the fools they are.
2012-11-14 05:18:11 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: well children, It's been nice seeing you refuse to read the news and pretend a press conference on the fiscal cliff didn't turn into a grilling on Libya - you're not smart enough to understand what's going on, but when you are, you might graduate from being a liter by then.


If there are all these lies like you say why not just cut and paste them?

Unless, you don't know what they are. You are just repeating right wing talking points but don't actually have proof to support these points. It's obvious you believe it only because sites like Hot Air tell you they are true and you don't look at them critically.

It's the same thing that happened in the election. These people said Romney would win in a landslide and they believed it even though facts said other wise.

You're believing bullshiat and not questioning it or asking for proof.
2012-11-14 05:15:06 PM
2 votes:
Ok I think it's obvious that bradkanus has no clue how the "president lied to us" even though he says it's true. He has just been told by Hot Air and other Republican sources that also told us Romney was going to win in a landslide so I am not going to stay here and harp on him, because it's obvious he is regurgitating talking points that he doesn't have any facts to support.
2012-11-14 05:11:51 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: vartian: bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.

You are so adorable. *pinches cheeks*

Where have you been? Must have been a tough couple weeks for a conservative living in Washington D.C. Did you see the fireworks?

I work in politics - I don't get excited about who is president. I pretty much only care about the house and senate and I'm butt hurt about the Senate - if you'd like to know.

too many of the morons in here have no idea what the president does and why he is of little importance with the current makeup of the house and senate. Did you not hear him running toward MItt's tax plan for the rich today?


Hah, more evasion~! Keep going there champ~!
2012-11-14 05:11:24 PM
2 votes:

Corvus: You seem to not even know what you are talking about all you have is what right wingers told you.

KIND OF LIKE WHEN THEY TOLD YOU ROMNEY WAS GOING TO WIN TUESDAY!!!

/yes I went there.


Keep going there. It will be my talking point until I die.
2012-11-14 05:10:02 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


I just pointed out from your link a statement that was true. So you must be wrong.
2012-11-14 05:09:26 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


I don't understand why don't you know what the quotes are?
2012-11-14 05:08:10 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?

Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

who does this guy speak for again?

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney became the first official to back away from the earlier declaration that the Benghazi assault was a "complex attack" by extremists. Instead, Carney told reporters, authorities "have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack."

Can you read that?
You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.

You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Just let me know if you can't read and I'll leave you alone. I mean, you have a guy who is claiming credit for all of his employees fark ups today and therefore admitting he is the source of them and now you don't want to let him own his mistakes.

If you're that dumb, I can't help you.

Why can't you cut and paste the exact quotes you are talking about instead of giving us links to talking points?


DO YOU OR DO YOU NOT KNOW OF THESE QUOTES YOU ARE REFERRING TO?

Why can't you quote them? Why can't you make you own argument? Why do you need others to think for you?

So you are saying that


Well why can't you back up your opinion with facts? I ask you for facts and you give me links to talking points. You seem to not even be able to support your own opinion with the facts why you think they are correct. Why do you think that is?

It's because you opinion is not based on facts it's based on what you want to believe.
2012-11-14 05:06:39 PM
2 votes:
GOP/Smirking Romney: We demand to know what happened right now!
White House: We think it may have been related to the thing that happened next door. The investigation is ongoing.
GOP/SR: How dare you not know every detail immediately? Conspiracy!
Post-election WH: STFU! Adults are speaking.
2012-11-14 05:02:35 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.

Give us these quotes then!!! Stop pretending because you or other right wing nut jobs said it it make it true.

That didn't work for the election did it? They said it was going to be a Romney landslide so why should we take their word on this?

who is "they" when they said Romney was going to win, and what does that have to do with me? I live in Virginia - I could see it was over for Romney in September. You obvioulsy watch way too much Fox and get your news form Drudge, because nobody I read had Romney winning at all.


Evasion noted; try harder 'bro.
2012-11-14 04:58:11 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.


Give us these quotes then!!! Stop pretending because you or other right wing nut jobs said it it make it true.

That didn't work for the election did it? They said it was going to be a Romney landslide so why should we take their word on this?
2012-11-14 04:57:05 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.


LMAO...

riddlethos.com

How about a more legitmate news source there binky? You know, a news outlet that didn't swear up and down that Romney was going to win in a landslide.
2012-11-14 04:53:52 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.



Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell? really...sure you aren't skewing that a bit?

/ok, I get it, you're a troll.
//have fun
2012-11-14 04:52:38 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.


Did I say give me links to more talking points and derp?

No I didn't. You seem to not even know what you are talking about all you have is what right wingers told you.

KIND OF LIKE WHEN THEY TOLD YOU ROMNEY WAS GOING TO WIN TUESDAY!!!


/yes I went there.
2012-11-14 04:50:47 PM
2 votes:

bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.


is the big deal here still over whether Obama said it was an act of terror because of the video or whether Obama said it was an attack by terrorists using the film protests as cover?

'cause that is stupid if so...I've heard this stuff over and over from the RW and still can't figure out what exactly you're all fired up about.

there's a reason this didn't catch on as a big scandal. Hint: it's the same reason Mitt didn't go after it Weeners debate. It's not the scandal you wish it was, it's just a tragedy, and most people realize what you and the Fox brigade is doing here.
2012-11-14 04:47:50 PM
2 votes:
The GOP is still (poorly) IRL trolling with the Benghazi hullabaloo?

'Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz. Get some new material, kk. Boring me. It's so last news cycle. Gosh.
2012-11-14 04:45:18 PM
2 votes:

Spaz-master: Rwa2play: bikerific: "Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack," Graham said in a statement released by his office.


What an absolute asshole. Wow.

I guess Graham gonna gets to know about the woodshed real close and personal...and often.

The woodshed will be the media damage to right and left.


More accurately, the media damage to the Washington press corps. You know, the same group that was blind to Bush about Iraq and ONLY started questioning his motives when McClellan wrote the tell all book.

You know, that group of assholes.
2012-11-14 04:27:56 PM
2 votes:
He should have called them out on sleeping through 9/11, the lies to get the Iraq war going, the disbanding of the Iraqi army and every single Bush fark up that they conveniently allowed to slide which were of more consequence than anything that happened in Benghazi.

If Mittens hadn't turned Benghazi into a focus of the campaign five minutes after it happened, then maybe intelligence officers and government official could have stood a chance to collect information and wait to speak when things were a little clearer. As it was... I would be surprised if the rush to address the issues had not caused contradictory information to come out.
2012-11-14 03:49:00 PM
2 votes:
if "taking them to the woodshed" means "asking someone to blame me for someone else's mistake and requesting a chat about it" then I've been wrong about that phrase for a while.

I thought the president did a good job of taking the blame instead of shirking it. He simply asked that the critics go after him, not her. I don't see how that is bad for McCain and Graham - they got the president to recognize their shenanigans on national TV bringing more wood to an already raging fire.

Subby obviously didn't watch the press conference.
2012-11-14 07:32:52 PM
1 votes:
Brave Sir Anus ran away...
2012-11-14 06:50:53 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: We now know that Rice lied - for sure 100 percent lied.


i43.photobucket.com
2012-11-14 06:46:55 PM
1 votes:

colon_pow: Well, we are finding out exactly what happened. I can tell you, as I've said over the last couple of months since this happened, the minute I found out what was happening, I gave three very clear directives," Obama said.

"Number one, make sure that we are securing our personnel and doing whatever we need to.

there's your lie, right there.


You have proof that that is *not* happening? At least within the parameters of what can be done while operating in various foreign lands. Or are you just assuming, based on your vast knowledge of Tom Clancy novels, that an unlimited number of Marines and tanks can be stationed at every outpost across the globe?
2012-11-14 06:45:00 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: I deserve criticism.


criticism? no, sympathy.
2012-11-14 06:42:31 PM
1 votes:

rwhamann: Boehner and Co. have to know that an impeachment vote would kill the Republican party forever. They are at least smart enough to realize that elections are won by winning over independents and moderates, and their fringe is too loud, too crass and too racist for the mainstream Republicans to keep quiet.


Boehner doesn't have control over his House. That fringe is leading him around by the short and curlies. I am expecting some noise out of the House about impeachment at some point in the next 4 years. I do agree with you that it will not be beneficial to them.
2012-11-14 06:41:03 PM
1 votes:

jso2897: A Midsummer Night's Toker: Why can't bradkanus provide any actual quotes from when the president lied?

Why do Farkers let themselves get trolled by somebody that weak?


It was more of a dogpile than a trolling. That can be fun sometimes.

/ Alright! It's over!
// Stop humping my leg! Quit!
/// Aw jeez. Now look what you've done. I need a towel.
2012-11-14 06:37:16 PM
1 votes:

jso2897: A Midsummer Night's Toker: Why can't bradkanus provide any actual quotes from when the president lied?

Why do Farkers let themselves get trolled by somebody that weak?


Oh for farks sake, man... give it a rest. Look... we take people at face value until we're certain they're a troll. If they're not trolling and just horribly misinformed, then we might actually help them understand the situation.
2012-11-14 06:36:51 PM
1 votes:

skepticultist: I don't see what Obama gets out of this either way.


He gets nothing. But the nutters get a rallying cry, "Benghazi! Benghazi!"
2012-11-14 06:36:00 PM
1 votes:

jso2897: Why do Farkers let themselves get trolled by somebody that weak?


Not to worry, I've had him tagged for a while. He pops up every couple of years spouting off the latest Republican talking points. I suspect he's just testing the waters with them and reports their efficacy back to his masters.
2012-11-14 06:35:00 PM
1 votes:
Bradanus got owned.
2012-11-14 06:29:30 PM
1 votes:
Dear Conservatives who are blow hards. The Benghazi chicken has been farked into oblivion. This is only going to paint you guys in a more dumbassed light.
2012-11-14 06:28:04 PM
1 votes:
Why can't bradkanus provide any actual quotes from when the president lied?
2012-11-14 06:27:30 PM
1 votes:

The Jami Turman Fan Club: jigger: [Why the hell aren't US embassies in hostile countries more secure? Jeez.

Republicans aren't going to call for investigations into a Republican administration, DUH.

Democrats didn't seem to care enough to call for investigations into any of these attacks.

A better question is, why are all of these questions asked when an embassy or consulate gets attacked, but nobody seems to give a shiat when our soldiers get killed from similar attacks in Iraq or Afghanistan. Apparently people who work for the State Department are sancrosanct, while the people who work for the military are just bullet stoppers.


They are not sacrosanct. Members of our diplomatic corp are well aware that when they are stationed in dangerous places, they can get hurt. They do it anyway, for the same reasons our men and women go to war - to serve our nation, and, if needed, die for it. It is horribly condescending and venal to exploit these heroes deaths for a few petty political points against a President you don't like.
2012-11-14 06:24:58 PM
1 votes:

crawlspace: So, we're all to believe that O knew absolutely nothing about the Patraeus investigation until now? Sounds legit.

/Hate to interrupt this circlejerk. Please continue.


Does anyone actually believe this would have changed the election?
2012-11-14 06:18:01 PM
1 votes:

jigger: [Why the hell aren't US embassies in hostile countries more secure? Jeez.

Republicans aren't going to call for investigations into a Republican administration, DUH.

Democrats didn't seem to care enough to call for investigations into any of these attacks.


A better question is, why are all of these questions asked when an embassy or consulate gets attacked, but nobody seems to give a shiat when our soldiers get killed from similar attacks in Iraq or Afghanistan. Apparently people who work for the State Department are sancrosanct, while the people who work for the military are just bullet stoppers.
2012-11-14 06:17:50 PM
1 votes:

Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.



Then give us the exact quote he lied about
2012-11-14 06:16:02 PM
1 votes:

Amdam: These next 4 years could be a lot of fun.


I'm hoping it will be. Life's been a tad boring, besides depressing, since Bush rode in and out of town.
2012-11-14 06:12:54 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus:

So, since I'm a failure here,


Cut!

That's a wrap!
2012-11-14 06:07:50 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: thanks for playing - you walked right into it.


Jesus fark. That was the single feeblest troll attempt in recent memory. Possibly... ever.

Perma-ignore.
2012-11-14 06:04:53 PM
1 votes:
Dogs bark - but the caravan moves on.
2012-11-14 06:00:52 PM
1 votes:

Apocalyptic Inferno: CynicalLA: Apocalyptic Inferno: Someone should be held accountable for this lapse.

Mixed messages definitely came out of the administration with Rice claiming the attacks resulted from a spontaneous protest. I don't have any problem with the way the actual attack was handled, but failure definitely occurred prior to it with security and after it with communication.

Like when Condi Rice was held accountable for that Bin Laden memo? Or when the Bush Administration invaded a country because of bad intelligence?

It's so pathetic how much debate devolves into tu quoque fallacies. This conversation is about Benghazi. It's not the point of every criticism of a Democrat that you should vote Republican. It's not BSARBVR. You should still be able to criticize your side without resorting to constant on-upsmanship. There are quite a few things i don't like about the first four years of Obama, and I will honestly criticize him for those, but I still voted for him.


This isn't about one-upsmanship. My point was that the people calling this a scandal are only doing it for political reasons. If someone did something illegal then they should be punished. There has been no proof of wrongdoing yet but I'm sure it's coming.
2012-11-14 05:57:02 PM
1 votes:
Apocalyptic Inferno: according to CNN, they knew it was a terrorist attack from day one.

CNN's unnamed law enforcement source is the only one saying that as a source, no? Everyone else saying it is just repeating him? What sort of "law enforcement source" has that info anyway? FBI?
2012-11-14 05:56:18 PM
1 votes:

Apocalyptic Inferno: Benghazi was a failure somewhere. There were previous attacks on the consulate, and repeated requests for enhanced security. This kind of even should have been absolutely no surprise. Either you provide the necessary security to protect your consulate, or if you can't (because Republicans blocked a security bill), you withdraw your consulate. Someone should be held accountable for this lapse.

Mixed messages definitely came out of the administration with Rice claiming the attacks resulted from a spontaneous protest. I don't have any problem with the way the actual attack was handled, but failure definitely occurred prior to it with security and after it with communication.


i18.photobucket.com
2012-11-14 05:55:05 PM
1 votes:
i5.photobucket.com
2012-11-14 05:53:36 PM
1 votes:
Man, Farkers are getting easy.
Trolled by a guy who calls himself "Brad K. Anus", who claims to be from Virginia in his post, claims to be from Texas in his profile, and provides links to right wing shiat blogs as "citations"
Pitiful. Get it together, you guys.

i18.photobucket.com
2012-11-14 05:49:18 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


"Arnold was an op-ed columist with the NY Post for eight years, currently writing for JewishWorldReview.com and FrontPageMag.com. Arnold can be reached at: ata­hlert[nospam-﹫-backwards]tsac­moc­*ne­t"

lol, "news source"
2012-11-14 05:43:39 PM
1 votes:

Satanic_Hamster: "Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack," Graham said in a statement released by his office.

So Mr. Graham is now fully admitting that Obama is completely and totally responsible for killing Bin Laden, right?


This is the exact kind of response Republicans would have had if the Bin laden raid failed and elite Navy Seals died.
2012-11-14 05:37:54 PM
1 votes:

Epoch_Zero: rufus-t-firefly: farking smackdown from orbit

Have mercy.


I'm waiting for bradkanus to go through the information he requested and show us what statements were lies. Hell, I didn't even edit them - a few of them were actually shown to be incorrect by later quotes. But he'll need to show us how it all ties together in one big coverup or he's full of shiat. Or at the least, he can show us that Biden was being a scheming mastermind when he said that "we" weren't told about needing security, and that Carney's correction was just part of the master plan.

I'm sure he's working on that right now, and will take us all to the woodshed soon.
2012-11-14 05:32:18 PM
1 votes:

Apocalyptic Inferno: Benghazi was a failure somewhere. There were previous attacks on the consulate, and repeated requests for enhanced security. This kind of even should have been absolutely no surprise. Either you provide the necessary security to protect your consulate, or if you can't (because Republicans blocked a security bill), you withdraw your consulate. Someone should be held accountable for this lapse.

Mixed messages definitely came out of the administration with Rice claiming the attacks resulted from a spontaneous protest. I don't have any problem with the way the actual attack was handled, but failure definitely occurred prior to it with security and after it with communication.


Who knows what was going on behind the scenes? You don't always want your enemies to know what you know. Saying "we think it was protests" can help keep the perpetrators' guard down.

They might as well be demanding answers from Obama on Bin Laden.

"You knew Bin Laden was living in Abbottabad for some time - why didn't you tell the American people?"
2012-11-14 05:32:17 PM
1 votes:

Apocalyptic Inferno: Benghazi was a failure somewhere. There were previous attacks on the consulate, and repeated requests for enhanced security. This kind of even should have been absolutely no surprise. Either you provide the necessary security to protect your consulate, or if you can't (because Republicans blocked a security bill), you withdraw your consulate. Someone should be held accountable for this lapse.

Mixed messages definitely came out of the administration with Rice claiming the attacks resulted from a spontaneous protest. I don't have any problem with the way the actual attack was handled, but failure definitely occurred prior to it with security and after it with communication.


There weren't mixed messages. When Susan Rice went on ABC that Sunday the official line of the administration was that it was a spontaneous attack. You can argue whether it was spontaneous or not, but that was the official line. All she did was repeat it. She's the friggen UN ambassador, not the head of the CIA. But rather than go after petraeus, they choose the easy target in a dress.
2012-11-14 05:26:15 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: you might graduate from being a liter by then.


I would just like to point out that this is the dumbest thing you said in this thread. And you have said a number of really dumb things.
2012-11-14 05:22:35 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: Ok I think it's obvious that bradkanus has no clue how the "president lied to us" even though he says it's true. He has just been told by Hot Air and other Republican sources that also told us Romney was going to win in a landslide so I am not going to stay here and harp on him, because it's obvious he is regurgitating talking points that he doesn't have any facts to support.

Okay - I'll turn the table. What is the Presdient's official "excuse" for the attacks. What exactly does he say happened. REmember - he had no idea what was going on September 12th. However today admitted they were "watching" the attack and couldn't clearly see the severity of the fighting going on.

So, since I'm a failure here, please educate me on the President's official position on the entire attack. I need to know obviously. Do not put links - I want quotes - the standard you request of me.


So you are admitting you were wrong and have no way to back up your allegations you were making earlier?
2012-11-14 05:19:43 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: I work in politics


somehow i find that both believable & frightening.
2012-11-14 05:19:01 PM
1 votes:

sprawl15: More_Like_A_Stain: There is no hook. This is more like a cat toy than a fishing lure.

none of my cats demand citations from their feather on a string


Your cats are smarter than brad is at this point.
2012-11-14 05:16:52 PM
1 votes:

More_Like_A_Stain: bradkanus: I work in politics

Janitor at the motor pool doesn't really qualify as "I work in politics"


Hey mister, that's Bradley K. Anus,executive transportation department refuse negotiator, (Class B), you're talking to.
2012-11-14 05:15:10 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?

Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.

You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Just let me know if you can't read and I'll leave you alone. I mean, you have a guy who is claiming credit for all of his employees fark ups today and therefore admitting he is the source of them and now you don't want to let him own his mistakes.

If you're that dumb, I can't help you.


From your link:

He added that there was no reason to think that the Benghazi attack wasn't related to the video, given that the clip had sparked protests in many Muslim cities.

"The unrest that we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive," Carney said.


OMG SMOKING GUN.

This: "We have no reason to think the attack wasn't related to the video, since we've seen so much unrest in reaction to it."

Doesn't quite equal this: "The video is the direct cause of the embassy attack."

Please, flail more.
2012-11-14 05:14:57 PM
1 votes:

Corvus: More_Like_A_Stain: bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601

How about a quote? Feel free to pull it from any of the links that you've provided. Or any other really. You don't even have to get fancy and turn the quote into a link. Just post a quote.

It's funny how they thing many right wingers repeating something makes it true.

Then reality like the election hits.


I mean, you just knew the usual suspects were going to come out and pull crap like this. Like Monty Python's black knight however, they seem to not realize they can't do crap except howl at the moon at this point.

So. Much. Fun.
2012-11-14 05:14:39 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/


Give us a fuking quote asshole!
2012-11-14 05:12:56 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: I work in politics


Janitor at the motor pool doesn't really qualify as "I work in politics"
2012-11-14 05:10:24 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


How about a quote? Feel free to pull it from any of the links that you've provided. Or any other really. You don't even have to get fancy and turn the quote into a link. Just post a quote.
2012-11-14 05:10:18 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.


Welcome to the Bannation - Population = you
2012-11-14 05:10:05 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

how about Canadian press?

http://www.canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/50601


Oh you mean that bastion of conservative press in Canada? That one?

Y-you do know your BS can be countered with just a few clicks on a keyboard and a search engine right?
2012-11-14 05:08:14 PM
1 votes:

Corvus: bradkanus: who is "they" when they said Romney was going to win, and what does that have to do with me? I live in Virginia - I could see it was over for Romney in September. You obvioulsy watch way too much Fox and get your news form Drudge, because nobody I read had Romney winning at all.

Well the site you just linked DID!!!!!


Michael Barone's prediction: Romney 315, Obama 223

So which is it? Are they trustworthy or not?


I love how he tries to evade it...but it's like stepping right into the path of a Claymore when your trying to evade the pressure-sensitive mine.
2012-11-14 05:07:46 PM
1 votes:
So, since he doesn't have to worry about re-election now, he can call out their grandstanding a little more forcefully.
2012-11-14 05:07:15 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.


Did you run out of Preparation-H? Used it all Tuesday night, I bet.
2012-11-14 05:06:06 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.


Romney should have went after Obama on that during the debates or something.
2012-11-14 05:04:42 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.


You are so adorable. *pinches cheeks*

Where have you been? Must have been a tough couple weeks for a conservative living in Washington D.C. Did you see the fireworks?
2012-11-14 05:03:46 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: The president's staff has given four stories at his direction. He lied.

Give us these quotes then!!! Stop pretending because you or other right wing nut jobs said it it make it true.

That didn't work for the election did it? They said it was going to be a Romney landslide so why should we take their word on this?

who is "they" when they said Romney was going to win, and what does that have to do with me? I live in Virginia - I could see it was over for Romney in September. You obvioulsy watch way too much Fox and get your news form Drudge, because nobody I read had Romney winning at all.


Ok I am taking one of your quotes from that link then:


"The unrest that we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive," Carney said.

Is that a lie? Yes or No?

Was their unrest in the region because of the video YES or NO?
2012-11-14 05:02:20 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?

Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.

You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Just let me know if you can't read and I'll leave you alone. I mean, you have a guy who is claiming credit for all of his employees fark ups today and therefore admitting he is the source of them and now you don't want to let him own his mistakes.

If you're that dumb, I can't help you.


Ok fine: lets take your link:

"The unrest that we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims, find offensive," Carney said.

So you are saying there was NO protest around that region you believe that is a lie?
2012-11-14 05:01:50 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?

Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.

You're obviously not going to follow the previous links that lay out what happened so I'll give you another one.

http://http://hotair.com//archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin -changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Just let me know if you can't read and I'll leave you alone. I mean, you have a guy who is claiming credit for all of his employees fark ups today and therefore admitting he is the source of them and now you don't want to let him own his mistakes.

If you're that dumb, I can't help you.


You know what I just pointed out in bold print? A news source that isn't worth wiping my ass with.

When you can retort me with a news source that isn't so full of crap, then I'll listen to you.
2012-11-14 05:01:10 PM
1 votes:

freetomato: I wish the has-been shell of a once-decent man that is McCain would just STFU - about everything from now on. Every time I hear him speak I can only think "thanks a bunch for foisting that loathsome hillbilly and her spawn on America, asshole".


I can always tell in threads such as this one who is too young to remember the Keating Five. McCain has always demonstrated rather flexible ethics.
2012-11-14 04:57:24 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Corvus: bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.

Then give us the exact quote he lied about.

choke on this ashole

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-told-cbs-hours-after-benghazi-a t tack-that-he-had-suspicion-that-event-was-pre-planned-so-why-did-the-s tory-change/


http://hotair.com/archives/2012/10/19/mcclatchy-obama-admin-changed-s t ory-on-benghazi-to-blame-video-3-days-after-attack/

Have you not watched the news. Obama said come after him for the lies he had his officials tell, so that makes him a liar.


right.... because opinions never change when facts are presented and suspicions are admissible in a court of law (as oppose.

pull your head out of your ass!
2012-11-14 04:55:43 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Didn't catch on as a scandal? He had to field a question about it in a press conference where his staff controls who gets picked to ask a question!!!! Do you not read the newspaper? This is still huge.

MItt didn't say anything in the debate because he farked up and jumped the gun when the story broke and didnt' want the president to beat him over the head with it. But you wouldn't know that because you don't read much, do you?


Then why do you not even now what was said? Why is your "proof" talking points from right wing sites? Can't you think for yourself? Why can't you show us what went wrong instead of just linking to talking points?

You seem to not understand what you are mad at because you seem unable to explain it.
2012-11-14 04:55:04 PM
1 votes:
We're going to have to watch several months of petty, transparently disingenuous impeachment hearings on this. It's all the GOP has to work with at this point. Naturally, they'll overreach.

I guess the Right Wing has to have something on which to focus their blithering indignation at getting their assess handed to them on election day. It might as well be this.
2012-11-14 04:54:13 PM
1 votes:

Gyrfalcon: As far as I can tell, something else is supposed to have happened that wasn't reported by the President either as a terrorist attack or not as a terrorist attack but which either was or wasn't a terrorist attack and should or shouldn't have been called one sooner (or later) than it was. Evidently talking about something based on what you know at the time and not what you're going to know in the future before you talk about it is bad; and you should only discuss things in light of what you're going to know instead of what you actually do know.


Exactly. The "Obama is lying" it Obama didn't say "I know for 100% it's a terrorist attack!!" before they have any evidence. A lot like how Bush attacked Iraq because they knew it was behind 9/11.
2012-11-14 04:52:07 PM
1 votes:

mjohnson71: culebra: Second Term Barack gives no quarter. Noted.

This could get real interesting if Obama spends the next 4 years with the restrictor plates off. It will be wonderfully entertaining if "playing-it-safe-trying-to-get-re elected" Obama is dead and "fark-you-I-Have-political-capital" Obama is the new normal.


That would be quite awesome.
2012-11-14 04:51:42 PM
1 votes:

Corvus: bradkanus: if "taking them to the woodshed" means "asking someone to blame me for someone else's mistake and requesting a chat about it" then I've been wrong about that phrase for a while

Sorry what mistake did she make actually?

"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 the wake of the revolution in Libya are quite common and accessible. And it then evolved from there," she told ABC.

Isn't that what happened?


As far as I can tell, something else is supposed to have happened that wasn't reported by the President either as a terrorist attack or not as a terrorist attack but which either was or wasn't a terrorist attack and should or shouldn't have been called one sooner (or later) than it was. Evidently talking about something based on what you know at the time and not what you're going to know in the future before you talk about it is bad; and you should only discuss things in light of what you're going to know instead of what you actually do know.
2012-11-14 04:49:12 PM
1 votes:
Does this confrontational style signal that the Senate is going to reform the filibuster rules, reducing the need for marginals like McCain and Graham?
2012-11-14 04:46:04 PM
1 votes:

bikerific: It is pretty gutsy to bring up Rice on the offensive like this.

The safe, non-controversial course of action would have been to just quietly not bring Rice up as potential nominee for anything. They knew that bringing her up would provide a venue for attacks regarding Benghazi, and they are are taking it head-on.


I think they are basically daring the republicans to impeach Obama. Heck, they may want the republicans to do it, to try.

I admit I kind of want to see them try, too. Obama would CRUSH them in the media.
2012-11-14 04:44:49 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.


Aww, who's a precious little dimwit? You are! Yes you are, you're a GOOOOD little dimwit! Here's a Scooby Snack.
2012-11-14 04:42:35 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: It's hilarious to see the left defend a guy who is one story #4 about Benghazi and flailing about in his own press conference trying to redirect the nation's attention from his fark up and his staff's fark up.

Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU. If you're fine with that, great. If not, just admit your jesus isn't perfect and start examining things a little deeper.


Still mad about last Tuesday?

/*trollgrin*
2012-11-14 04:41:14 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: Be partisan all you want, but the guy lied to YOU.


Then give us the exact quote he lied about.
2012-11-14 04:40:31 PM
1 votes:

bikerific: "Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack," Graham said in a statement released by his office.


What an absolute asshole. Wow.


Hmm wonder why he didn't hold Bush responsible for 9/11 or the MANY attack on US embassies and consults under Bush. Back then it was because "they hate our freedom".
2012-11-14 04:39:46 PM
1 votes:
Remember, Obama didn't catch bin Laden, but he personally screwed over the Benghazi consulate.
2012-11-14 04:36:50 PM
1 votes:
"Mr. President, don't think for one minute I don't hold you ultimately responsible for Benghazi. I think you failed as commander in chief before, during and after the attack," Graham said in a statement released by his office.


What an absolute asshole. Wow.
2012-11-14 04:35:08 PM
1 votes:

INeedAName: Corvus: [3.bp.blogspot.com image 480x480]

While I understand the meaning of your post, were there no embassy attacks between 2009 and today? It's a little disingenuous if you're just trying to say 'b-b-b-but Bush!'


I am not doing b-b-b-but Bush. I am showing that the Republicans are using two sets of criteria to judge Obama and Republicans. Not saying because it happened more under Bush that makes it an ok thing.

This is purely partisan and political and this proves it.

What embassy attacks are you exactly referring to? or is this made up BS?
2012-11-14 04:34:46 PM
1 votes:

bradkanus: if "taking them to the woodshed" means "asking someone to blame me for someone else's mistake and requesting a chat about it" then I've been wrong about that phrase for a while.

I thought the president did a good job of taking the blame instead of shirking it. He simply asked that the critics go after him, not her. I don't see how that is bad for McCain and Graham - they got the president to recognize their shenanigans on national TV bringing more wood to an already raging fire.

Subby obviously didn't watch the press conference.


Remember the part where he said "...they got a problem with me!", are you sure you watched the video?
2012-11-14 04:30:23 PM
1 votes:

kbronsito: He should have called them out on sleeping through 9/11, the lies to get the Iraq war going, the disbanding of the Iraqi army and every single Bush fark up that they conveniently allowed to slide which were of more consequence than anything that happened in Benghazi.


He should of asked him why weren't they so concerned about the multiple attack on embassies and consulates during Bush admin. But that would probably look petty.
2012-11-14 04:29:35 PM
1 votes:
Special prosecutor to go after Cantor and Shirtless FBI Himbo. Did their actions affect communication from Benghazi? Is the blood of four Americans on their head?
2012-11-14 04:26:59 PM
1 votes:

cryinoutloud: Spanky_McFarksalot: at first I was like, don't get to cocky.
but them I'm all like, you know what? fark 'um. they decided to fark over america so Obama would be a one term president, now that he won in a landslide, treat them like your biatch Barack!

I'm OK with this. Most Republicans haven't done much except accuse Obama of ruining the country since the day BEFORE he got into office.


Needed a little adjustment.
2012-11-14 04:20:15 PM
1 votes:

Spanky_McFarksalot: at first I was like, don't get to cocky.
but them I'm all like, you know what? fark 'um. they decided to fark over america so Obama would be a one term president, now that he won in a landslide, treat them like your biatch Barack!


I'm OK with this. Most Republicans haven't done much except accuse Obama of ruining the country since the day he got into office.
2012-11-14 04:14:42 PM
1 votes:
What's significant is that he explicitly called out his opponents at his very Boobies-election press conference.

fun with filters
2012-11-14 04:09:41 PM
1 votes:
Do not question the woodshed. The woodshed is sound.
 
Displayed 133 of 133 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report