Why is Bengazi such a big deal according to Republicans?

[adaher]

The Republicans got punished in the elections. When this is over, Eric Holder will go back to his nice life outside of politics and assuming Hillary doesn’t get successfully thrown under the bus by the Obama campaign, she’ll be the frontrunner in 2016.

[bengangmo]

You know what surprises me the most?

That an attack on an embassy / consulate - which pretty much exist to further political interests, should draw a political response?

Who woulda thunk it?

[adaher]

Anything that an administration lies about justifies a political response.

[CaptMurdock]

Really? Didn’t look that way in 2004…

[elucidator]

Yeah, well, let bygones be bygones, its not like those people will get any deader.

[adaher]

But wait, it gets worse! When Axelrod was asked about whether Obama met with the national security council, or how soon he spoke with key members to get information, he couldn’t answer!

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/axelrod-bobs-and-weaves-over-obamas-level-of-engagement-the-day-of-the-benghazi-attack.php

Sounds to me like someone wasn’t engaged and just went to his normal fundraiser. Which answers Jon Stewart’s question.

[adaher]

And as for the latest Democratic big lie:

Libya Embassy Security Officer: Obama’s security strategy was ‘hope’

Was the refusal to provide more security caused by budget cuts to embassy security? “No, sir,” Charlene Lamb, the Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for International Programs, told the committee.

Lamb said that the State Department was right not to grant Nordstrom’s request for more security. “We had the correct number of assets in Benghazi on the night of 9/11,” Lamb said, per The Cable, citing the Libyan security personnel.

[elucidator]

Well, there you have it, straight from the horse’s orifice, the Washington Examiner. From Sludge Drudge and Batshit Breitbart right to the commentary pages of one of America’s most highly regarded sources of wing-nut glurge, this thing is spreading like mildfire.

[John_Mace]

If your contention that this is a story only the RW media is interested in, you’re wrong. It’s all over the news. And it will certainly be a topic of discussion at the debate tomorrow.

Bush is gone. The focus now is on what Obama did or did not do.

[Lightnin]

@John_Mace

If your contention that this is a story only the RW media is interested in, you’re wrong. It’s all over the news. And it will certainly be a topic of discussion at the debate tomorrow.

Bush is gone. The focus now is on what Obama did or did not do.

For the record, is there anything Obama could say which would, in your mind, exonerate him?

[elucidator]

@John_Mace

If your contention that this is a story only the RW media is interested in, you’re wrong…

Authoritative as always, John. Faced with such hard facts, what can I do but cringe and slink away?

[Polerius]

@John_Mace

Bush is gone. The focus now is on what Obama did or did not do.

So what that Bush is gone? Honest people should be consistent in their reactions.

To me, a Republican who gets bent out of shape for this story, when they didn’t blame Bush for the security failure that allowed 9/11 to happen and for all the lies that resulted in the Iraq war, is like a Democrat who was OK with Clinton getting a blow job in the Oval Office, but would get bent out of shape if there was a story that a Republican president might have touched a female intern’s arm once.

[elucidator]

And then there’s the Apology Tour. We shouldn’t forget about that, simply because it never actually happened.

[Lobohan]

@adaher

It is: Medicare Advantage,

Nonsense. Medicare Advantage is safe. Although it is largely worthless. And it’s not like the administration is pretending they won’t cut it. http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0912/81417.html

Greece’s EU exit,

Poorly sourced. And aside from that, it’s not like the EU are excited at the prospect of a president Romney, since he’s promoting an economic plan that is based on fairy dust. The EU have reason enough to hope that a rational president emerges from the election.

From: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2012-09-21/business/sns-rt-us-eurozone-greece-reportbre88k0p5-20120921_1_troika-eu-imf-euro-zone-finance-ministers

@Chicago Tribune

“As far as European leaders are concerned, they don’t want Romney, so they’re probably willing to do anything to help Obama’s chances,” said the source, an EU official involved in finding solutions to the debt crisis.

WARN notices.

I believe you were informed in a previous thread about the WARN notices and how they aren’t currently justified.

THey also considered opening the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to get prices down, but I guess that would have been too obviously political.

All presidents consider opening the SPR when gas prices are high.

And now this. They had obviously hoped that they could keep a lid on this until the investigation was complete in December.

In other words, you have nothing, but will point at anything the administration does and shriek in outrage. This is nonsense and only because you already loathe Obama, you see phantoms where there are none.

No, they knew the day after. Yet stuck to their Youtube story for over a week. As Jon Stewart said, “Do these guys talk to each other?”

They didn’t stick to the story for a week. The story changed as elements came to light.

They erroneously thought that it was a group of militants spurred by the Cairo demonstrations.

http://thehill.com/blogs/global-affairs/terrorism/261839-timeline-of-libya-attack-reveals-administration-contradictions-

• Sept. 11: Protesters converge on the U.S. embassy in Cairo, scale its walls and replace the U.S. flag with the Islamist banner. The protests eventually spread to 20 countries around the world. That night, Republican candidate Mitt Romney criticizes an embassy statement denouncing the video before the events unfolding in Libya are known to the world. Late that night, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton says in a statement that “some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet.”

• Sept. 12: Media outlets report that Stevens and three other Americans have been killed in an attack by well-armed militants. Obama denounces an “outrageous and shocking attack” without mentioning the video or terrorism. Reuters reports for the first time that some administration officials believe the assault “bears the hallmarks of an organized attack.”

• Sept. 13: White House spokesman Jay Carney says “the protests we’re seeing around the region are in reaction to this movie.”

• Sept. 14: Carney says the administration had “no actionable intelligence” about a pending attack.

• Sept. 16: Susan Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the UN, does the rounds on the Sunday talk shows and says the video is the “proximate cause” of the assault in Benghazi. “Our current best assessment, based on the information that we have at present, is that, in fact, what this began as, it was a spontaneous — not a premeditated — response to what had transpired in Cairo,” Rice tells ABC. That same day, interim Libyan president Mohamed Magarief insists on CBS that “it was planned, definitely.”

They assumed it was an event that sparked an already existing cell to make an attack. But when they found that wasn’t the case, they changed the tune.

Compare this with Romney who decided that the attacks were an outrage and held a completely backwards news conference before knowing anything.

In other words, you are screaming at the normal and calling it absurd.

[Lobohan]

@elucidator

And then there’s the Apology Tour. We shouldn’t forget about that, simply because it never actually happened.

Remember that time Obama rode Air Force One into battle with the Space Dragons?

Why don’t Republicans ever give him credit for that?

What, we can’t make up good things Obama did to counterbalance the Republicans making up bad things?

[Gyrate]

@magellan01

Two, it demonstrates that the idea that Obama is curing Islamic relations is fantasy.

Yeah, I mean, if the people of Libya were more pro-America and against Islamic terrorists than before, surely we would have seen something in the news about it.

Something like this.

And this.

But I’m sure they would have done the same with any other President in the White House, so Obama gets no credit for those. Right?

[Gangster_Octopus]

Oh dear, the GOP narrative may be falling apart. NYT: Election-Year Stakes Overshadow Nuances of Libya Investigation

To Libyans who witnessed the assault and know the attackers, there is little doubt what occurred: a well-known group of local Islamist militants struck without any warning or protest, and **they did it in retaliation for the video[b/]. That is what the fighters said at the time, speaking emotionally of their anger at the video without mentioning Al Qaeda, Osama bin Laden or the terrorist strikes of 11 years earlier. And it is an explanation that tracks with their history as a local militant group determined to protect Libya from Western influence.

United States intelligence agencies have reserved final judgment pending a full investigation, leaving open the possibility that anger at the video might have provided an opportunity for militants who already harbored anti-American feelings. But so far the intelligence assessments appear to square largely with local accounts. Whether the attackers are labeled “Al Qaeda cells” or “aligned with Al Qaeda,” as Republicans have suggested, depends on whether that label can be used as a generic term for a broad spectrum of Islamist militants, encompassing groups like Ansar al-Shariah whose goals were primarily local, as well as those who aspire to join a broader jihad against the West.

[elucidator]

Of course, they might well be lying, trying to assert a justification for their attacks to blunt the popularity of Ambassador Stevens among the Libyan people. Or it may even be true, for that matter, speculation about the motives of viciously irrational people tends to be unproductive.

[Euphonious_Polemic]

@Lightnin

For the record, is there anything Obama could say which would, in your mind, exonerate him?

Maybe he should bring his birth certificate to the debate. That should quiet the birthers down at least…

oh wait. Nevermind.

No - there is absolutely nothing whatsoever Obama could say to exonerate himself with a certain segment of the population. They have gone beyond irrational.

[Bookkeeper]

One of the “political issues” which seems to be overlooked here is that there’s another country and government involved in this as well. The US administration has to avoid screwing up their relationship with what is one of the few more-or-less friendly governments in the area, both in reaction to this incident, and in the US actions leading up to it. While talk about beefing up security is nice, most countries are kind of leery about foreign governments stationing large numbers of armed men on their soil, especially in a consulate, which has very few of the diplomatic privileges allowed to actual embassies.

Would Americans be happy if the government of China decided that there were creditable reports of strong anti-Chinese feelings in the US, and they needed to station a couple of platoons of Chinese soldiers at their consulate in San Francisco?