Shock Me! Give Me ONE Liberal Who Will Be Honest!

[craner]

And admit at least ONE of these items are true. I happen to believe all of them are true because I use my brain to THINK and REASON for myself. Now I am a tiny bit encouraged by some in the media who are FINALLY paying attention to Benghazi like Maureen Dowd of the NY Times ( http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/18/opinion/sunday/dowd-is-rice-cooked.html?ref=opinion&_r=0 ) but its sadly too few. Anyway who among you libs will be honest enough to agree to one or more of these:

1. Obama Admin failed in having ample security there, ignored the growing threats, refused requests from those in Benghazi for more security.

2. Obama Admin failed in responding to the attack and possibly saving lives.

3. Obama and his Admin lied their asses off following the attack blaming a video so not to hurt his election.

Shock me libs....anyone out there not under the POS's spell?

 

[gallantwarrior]

No one in the MSM will admit that this administration is lying out their ass about Benghazi. Obama not only knew of the need for increased security, he denied it prior to the attack, and he watched while AMERICANS were murdered by his muslim allies.

 

[Black_Label]

I use my brain to THINK and REASON for myself.

If you did, you never would have posted something so stupid in the first place.

 

[Lakhota]

Honest? You stupid fucking NaziCons don't know the meaning of the word.

 

[craner]

Figures. No one yet. Typical pathetic answers from the Obamabots. Arent you ashamed to be so f'ing blind to truth because of your allegiance to the POS? How about putting America first idiots?

 

[craner]

EVERY single one of my points are facts without question. amazing how so far not one of you who support Obama will admit to even one of them. Pretty sad . No wonder the country's going downhill.

 

[del]

those damn negroes are ruining the country, aren't they?

 

[Lakhota]

These NaziCon Taliban threads are funny...

 

[craner]

So let me get this straight in your liberal fantasy land.....Obama made sure there was ample security and approved the requests for more......he sent in all the help needed to save them, not his fault they failed...and it was a stupid video just as the POS said it was.

OK....now I get it.

 

[Lakhota]

EVERY single one of my points are facts without question. amazing how so far not one of you who support Obama will admit to even one of them. Pretty sad . No wonder the country's going downhill.

Facts? NaziCons don't need no stinkin' facts...

 

[Lakhota]

So let me get this straight in your liberal fantasy land.....Obama made sure there was ample security and approved the requests for more......he sent in all the help needed to save them, not his fault they failed...and it was a stupid video just as the POS said it was.

OK....now I get it.

Do you have the proper security clearance and need/right to know such information before the final investigations are completed and reported?

 

[craner]

Romney??? Whats he got to do with this topic? Typical BS from you loons.

Its pretty simple really. Your messiah failed in securing these people, failed in helping them and then lied his pathetic ass off following it. Truth hurts...hopefully he pays for it too.

POS.

 

[craner]

So let me get this straight in your liberal fantasy land.....Obama made sure there was ample security and approved the requests for more......he sent in all the help needed to save them, not his fault they failed...and it was a stupid video just as the POS said it was.

OK....now I get it.

Do you have the proper security clearance and need/right to know such information before the final investigations are completed and reported?

Yea...its called common sense.

 

[Lakhota]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vn_PSJsl0LQ&feature=player_detailpage]Jerry, just remember. It's not a lie... if you believe it... - YouTube[/ame]

 

[squeeze berry]

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1cUNNKzj_Nc]george costanza - i was in the pool - YouTube[/ame]

 

[craner]

Bam hides terror truth

By MICHAEL GOODWIN
Last Updated: 4:26 AM, November 18, 2012
Posted: 1:43 AM, November 18, 2012



Until Friday, there were two possible explanations for why the White House failed to immediately call the Benghazi attack an act of terrorism. One was incompetence, the other was worse.

Now there is only one, and it is the worse one. Based on the persuasive testimony of ex-CIA boss David Petraeus, it is clear the Obama administration made a deliberate decision to mislead Congress and the American people.

The repeated claim that the attack was spontaneous and grew out of a demonstration against an anti-Islam video — a claim made by the president and secretary of State as they stood next to the bodies of four dead Americans — was a monstrous lie. It was vile and done for the basest of reasons.

Because we now know the truth of what happened — CIA reports were edited to remove the names of al Qaeda groups involved in the attack, Petraeus said under oath — we also know the motive. It was political self-preservation, meaning the president and his team put politics first.

The timing helps tell the tale. Just days removed from his Charlotte convention, where he danced on the grave of Osama bin Laden and boasted that al Qaeda was decimated, Obama couldn’t bear to admit that affiliated groups were thriving in North Africa. And he certainly couldn’t admit they had carried out a murderous attack on our consulate on the 11th anniversary of the most awful day in American history.

To do so would be to acknowledge the failure of his decision to ignore hard-line Islamists and that his team had erred egregiously in rejecting pleas for more security from Libya Ambassador Chris Stevens.

So the president lied, including in a speech to the United Nations, where he cited the video as the reason for the attack. He sent out reams of flunkies to do the same, including his snide press secretary, Jay Carney.

Most notably, UN Ambassador Susan Rice went on five Sunday television shows to spin the nonsense about the hijacking of a demonstration — a demonstration that never existed. Rice made a fool of herself, and now, she, too is damaged goods.

Oddly, Petraeus, brought down by the reckless affair with his biographer, nonetheless looks like the only honest man in the drama.

A briefing he gave soon after the attack is now more suspect because it adhered to the party line, despite his belief that it was always a terrorist attack.

But Friday in his testimony behind closed doors, Petraeus told the truth as he knew it, even though the administration announced the day before that it was investigating his conduct at the CIA.

If that was meant to pressure him to protect the president, it failed spectacularly. Whatever his personal failings, Petraeus reinforced his reputation for professional integrity.

The next move is up to Congress. While Democrats are predictably and shamefully trying to deny the significance of Petraeus’ revelation, Republicans say they are determined to get the full truth, wherever the hunt takes them.

Especially as the president begins a new term, and huge economic and tax difference must be resolved, the country would be better served if the administration co-operates. But their behavior up to now does not make that seem likely. Having built their web of lies, it would be hard to suddenly come clean.

The first tests will come with the next round of hearings. Any attempt by the White House to block the appearance of any official who played a role in shaping the false narrative should be seen as proof that the stonewalling continues.

In that case, the full power of the constitution must be brought to bear. Nobody is above the law, even the president.

 

[Lakhota]

Michael Goodwin? New York Post? Funny...

 

[OKTexas]

Da zombies are in fine form tonight.

 

[craner]

Facts

 

[Lakhota]

Facts? Not from Goodwin or New York Post...