Yes he does... and not one legitimate SCANDAL! But that won't stop the dumpster divers!
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"Legitimate" (actual, real, valid) as compared to "fictional".
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
"Legitimate" (actual, real, valid) as compared to "fictional".
A dead ambassador is fictional? Susan Rice never blamed his death on a spontaneous protest? Obama didn't stand in front of the UN and condemn a YouTube video? Didn't know that...
A dead ambassador is fictional? Susan Rice never blamed his death on a spontaneous protest? Obama didn't stand in front of the UN and condemn a YouTube video? Didn't know that...
Cicero. You used to give actual opposing views. You used to (mistaken as they were)have an opinion on issues. You used to rebut an issue with an opposing view. Lately you have only responded with sarcasm, straw men or ridicule. What happened? Did the fact that I was usually correct and that you were usually in error finally end your attempt at any kind of discussion? To your post: ~The ambassador is dead. ~Susan Rice reported that there was a spontaneous protest (which is true) although it was in parallel with the Benghazi attack, not the main focus of it. ~Obama did mention a youtube video protest which DID happen, along with the deadly attack on the consulate.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Cicero. You used to give actual opposing views. You used to (mistaken as they were)have an opinion on issues. You used to rebut an issue with an opposing view. Lately you have only responded with sarcasm, straw men or ridicule. What happened? Did the fact that I was usually correct and that you were usually in error finally end your attempt at any kind of discussion? To your post: ~The ambassador is dead. ~Susan Rice reported that there was a spontaneous protest (which is true) although it was in parallel with the Benghazi attack, not the main focus of it. ~Obama did mention a youtube video protest which DID happen, along with the deadly attack on the consulate.
Man, straw man has been your rebuttals of choice lately. Every one of your posts on this tread and most others are straw men or red herrings. Every time Obama is criticized, you either prop up George W Bush or another republican, or dismiss it as illegitimate. I could easily call you on your straw man posts, diverting attention away from Obama policy decisions and deflecting it onto your straw man. But for the most part, I play along.
Now, do I care about a dead ambassador? No...Do I enjoy pointing out lying-thieving politicians who will deceive the people with well crafted rhetoric, and total disregard for dead Americans? HELL YES! At some point, the little mundane people will realize the "leaders" in government don't give a sh*t about them.
Man, straw man has been your rebuttals of choice lately. Every one of your posts on this tread and most others are straw men or red herrings. Every time Obama is criticized, you either prop up George W Bush or another republican, or dismiss it as illegitimate. I could easily call you on your straw man posts, diverting attention away from Obama policy decisions and deflecting it onto your straw man. But for the most part, I play along.
Now, do I care about a dead ambassador? No...Do I enjoy pointing out lying-thieving politicians who will deceive the people with well crafted rhetoric, and total disregard for dead Americans? HELL YES! At some point, the little mundane people will realize the "leaders" in government don't give a sh*t about them.
Yesterday I asked my girl/good friend if she ever heard of Benghazi. She said " it sounds familiar ". no joke.
Actually, it is disgusting that the cartoon artist would compare an issues as significant as theTerrorist Attack that led to the Assassination of an American Ambassador (and 3 other Americans) and the very questionable trading of 5 known Terrorist murderers for 1 American P.O.W. - comparing these with trash in a dumpster.
Apparently, neither Obama nor the Lame Stream media has any shame or even a shred of common decency anymore.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
PRUDEN: The question to haunt the West Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
When the going gets tough, the tough are supposed to get going. But not in Obama World. Not in Hillary World, either. When the telephone rings at 3 o’clock in the morning the safe response is to let it ring. It might be bad news. Time to turn over and try to get back to sleep. The Senate Intelligence Committee’s long-anticipated and much-feared report on its investigation into what happened at the American legation in Benghazi on the night of Sept. 11, 2012, was devastating in its particulars. The senators cite chapter and verse of the kind of incompetence and irresponsibility that we once thought was all you could expect in banana republics and backwaters of the undeveloped world. But it was more than that: The report, and the official response to it, revealed the truly terrifying. What kind of idiot country are we becoming in this second decade of the 21st century? An official spokesman for the State Department, which imagines it’s the keeper of the nation’s conscience, suggested that when the going gets tough, the tough run home. Maybe the world is just too dangerous for Americans to get out and about. “Hard decisions must be made when it comes to whether the United States should operate in dangerous overseas locations.” Quote, unquote. There is no understanding of history in the nooks and crannies of this administration, that the United States has never retreated from “operating in dangerous overseas locations,” and the day it does the nation is finished. Not so long ago everyone understood that, and gloried in the determination that such a day would never come. Stonewall Jackson warned soldiers “never take counsel with your fears.” It was an admonition for one and all. Franklin D. Roosevelt did not say, on Dec. 8, 1941, that “the empire of Japan” looked pretty tough at Pearl Harbor, with all those bombs and stuff, and maybe Congress should make a “hard decision” to bring everybody home. Really, who would miss all that sand in Hawaii? Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower did not say, on June 7, 1945, that he had looked over the carnage at Omaha Beach of the day before and cabled the White House that “hard decisions must be made when it comes to whether the United States should operate in dangerous overseas locations.” All that rain, not to say anything about the mud, blood and gore, and not an umbrella in anybody’s backpack. Who needs Normandy, anyway? Why couldn’t everyone just catch a train to Paris and spend the afternoon with an aperitif on the Champs Elysees? A mere spokesman at the State Department, which imagines that its true mission is to give away what blood and guts of others win, does not speak for the nation. Such a spokesman does not necessarily speak for the president and his secretary of State, but this remark, which will be carefully read and considered in every foreign ministry and terrorist’s cave where evil men meet to conspire against the last best hope of men yearning to breathe free, reflects the clear and present mindset of both President Obama and Hillary Clinton. We see this mindset reflected in everything the president and his minions do. This is the mindset Hillary wants to take to the White House. We have heard no one at the White House or in Foggy Bottom step up to disown this poisonous sentiment. The cocker spaniels and poodles of press and tube have not even noticed the remark and its obvious implications for America’s place in the world, and how the rest of the world will regard and respond to America. The Senate Intelligence Committee barely mentions Hillary Clinton in the summary of its investigation. There’s no mystery about why. The Republicans on the Intelligence Committee got the strongest report they could, and the price was going easy on the woman the Democrats expect to be their candidate for president in 2016. “The great question of our day,” said Ariel Sharon, who died only the other day, “is whether the Jewish people of Israel can find within us the will to survive as a nation.” This is the question asked not just of Israel, but the question that haunts every thoughtful man and woman in the West, where we see all around us confusion and complacency in the face of challenge. Blind ambition is never a substitute for leadership. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton prove it every day.
Wesley Pruden is editor emeritus of The Washington Times.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
This is what difference it makes, Hillary … by Joseph Curl who covered the White House and politics for a decade for The Washington Times. He can be reached at josephcurl@gmail.com and on Twitter @josephcurl.
Hillary “What Difference Does It Make?” Clinton made a remarkable statement this week that fell by the wayside of the Bergdahl and VA scandals engulfing her former boss’s presidency. SEE ALSO: Hillary Clinton on Benghazi: ‘There will never be perfect clarity’ The one-time secretary of state, pimping her new book “Hard Choices,” declared in her chapter on the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in Benghazi that “There will never be perfect clarity on everything that happened.” In the book, Mrs. Clinton takes a defiant tone on the 2012 attacks that left four Americans dead, and mocks the multiple congressional investigations that have followed. “It is unlikely that there will ever be anything close to full agreement on exactly what happened that night, how it happened, or why it happened. But that should not be confused with a lack of effort to discover the truth or to share it with the American people,” she wrote. Her conclusion is remarkable because accountability is what the Constitution sets up for all government officials. We can — and should — know every detail about the events that occurred that night, when a U.S. ambassador was killed for the first time in more than 20 years. Team Clinton first dumped excerpts from the 34-page chapter on a Friday — the old Clinton trick of releasing unpleasant information just before the weekend so it seems like old news come sun-up on Monday. She made multiple excuses — the opposite of accountability — saying she never saw memos requesting additional security at the dangerous outpost in Libya. She explained that the dispatches were addressed to her because of a “procedural quirk” and she never actually saw them. Such small-ball emails don’t make their way to the top dog: “That’s not how it works. It shouldn’t. And it didn’t,” she wrote.
But a prime questions is: Why not? The multiple cables from Libya clearly detailed a growing problems; other embassies were closing up shop and pulling out at the time, so why wouldn’t the security of an American ambassador be exactly the kind of issue that rose to the secretary of state’s attention? Oversight, at least according to the Founders, falls to Congress. Lawmakers, elected by the people to check the power of presidential appointees, have wide-ranging means to require federal officials to provide information — whether they like it or not. But here again, Mrs. Clinton sought to pre-empt a newly commissioned committee set up to probe the deadly attack. “I will not be a part of a political slugfest on the backs of dead Americans. It’s just plain wrong, and it’s unworthy of our great country. Those who insist on politicizing the tragedy will have to do so without me,” she wrote. More, she blames the media for, as the left-leaning Politico website that was handed the book’s early excerpts put it, “manipulating a tragedy for partisan gain.” There is a “regrettable amount of misinformation, speculation, and flat-out deceit by some in politics and the media,” she wrote, but new information from “a number of reputable sources continues to expand our understanding of these events.” Indeed it does. One such nugget was the sudden release of internal White House memos that showed top Obama aides sought to minimize the fallout of the attacks, just two months before the 2012 presidential election. Communications Director Ben Rhodes wrote talking points “to underscore that these protests are rooted in an Internet video, and not a broader failure of policy.” But that email was never handed over to lawmakers, despite demands and subpoenas. The talking point emerged only after a Freedom of Information Act request from a gadfly government watchdog group.
One lawmaker, Rep. Frank Wolf, Virginia Republican, summed up the issue: “It is now abundantly clear that senior White House staff were directly involved in coordinating the messaging in response to the Benghazi attacks and were actively working to tie the reason to the infamous Internet video, which they knew from the CIA and others was demonstrably false. In short, the administration, specifically the White House, lied about a matter with direct bearing on U.S. national security in order to influence an electoral outcome.” Hillary may claim that there will never be “perfect clarity” on Benghazi, but lawmakers should insist otherwise — and demand answers.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
Spin spin spin... but no matter how hard they try, the Right still can't invent an Obama Scandal.
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Spin spin spin... but no matter how hard they try, the Right still can't invent an Obama Scandal.
No one has to "invent" an Obama Scandal. His administration has been one scandal after another,
And it is not just "the Right" who is disgusted with Obama's and Hilary's handling of Benghazi and other things. Many middle of the road Americans - a lot of whom are registered Democrats think Obama and Hilary acted disgracefully during the Benghazi Terrorist Attack and Assassinations and in their attempts to cover-up their mess.
George Amedore & Christian Klueg for NYS Senate 2016 Pete Vroman for State Assembly 2016[/size][/color]
"For this is what America is all about. It is the uncrossed desert and the unclimbed ridge. It is the star that is not reached and the harvest that is sleeping in the unplowed ground." Lyndon Baines Johnson
DVOR posts his/her opinion as if it were fact. The FACTS: June 9 2014:
Quoted Text
~"When she stepped down in early 2013, her approval ratings were sky high - she stood at 66% in a CNN/ORC International poll and 68% in an ABC News/Washington Post survey. While those numbers have deteriorated a bit, they remain high: 59% of people questioned in an ABC New/Washington Post poll conducted a week ago gave a thumbs-up to the job Clinton did at the State Department."
(Clinton topped Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, 53%-43%, in the new ABC News/Washington Post survey.)
The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness. John Kenneth Galbraith
Logged
