Infidels

[erfalf]

I don't need to figure it out. I will commend Obama for not giving in to the shrinking violets who want to let terrorists dictate our actions and reactions, and instead letting the Libyan people deal with the attackers, which they are doing.

Personally, I have no problem with a no comment. That at the very least would be respectable. But to blatantly continue a misleading line of thought in order to I don't know what? Seriously. I think the partisan hat is pulled on pretty tight on this matter for some reason.

[Conan71]

So you are saying the president has a duty to tell the public everything he knows or suspects as soon as he learns about it, got it. That does not seem wise in the real world.

When exactly did Bush hold his news conference to tell the American public that we knew where Bin Laden was way back in 2001 and that he over ruled special forces plans to go and get him?
http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-18560_162-4494937.html

Uh, where in that story does it say that Bush was the one who over-rode DF's strategy?

[Gaspar]

Personally, I have no problem with a no comment. That at the very least would be respectable. But to blatantly continue a misleading line of thought in order to I don't know what? Seriously. I think the partisan hat is pulled on pretty tight on this matter for some reason.

Exfreekinzactly!

[Townsend]

Personally, I have no problem with a no comment. That at the very least would be respectable. But to blatantly continue a misleading line of thought in order to I don't know what? Seriously. I think the partisan hat is pulled on pretty tight on this matter for some reason.

You're talking about Fox news stories now right?

[erfalf]

You're talking about Fox news stories now right?

Ignore, ignore, ignore. Make sure that hat stays on tight.

[nathanm]

But to blatantly continue a misleading line of thought in order to I don't know what?

You're making smile up now. He never said it wasn't a terrorist attack. The question was whether it was planned in advance or whether it was a spontaneous reaction to the opportunity that presented itself. Apparently, they thought that the evidence was more supportive of the latter. Not that it matters in the least as long as the people who did it are being dealt with. You could call it sunshine and roses and our consulate would still be in ruins and people would still be dead.

[erfalf]

You're making smile up now. He never said it wasn't a terrorist attack. The question was whether it was planned in advance or whether it was a spontaneous reaction to the opportunity that presented itself. Apparently, they thought that the evidence was more supportive of the latter. Not that it matters in the least as long as the people who did it are being dealt with. You could call it sunshine and roses and our consulate would still be in ruins and people would still be dead.

Talk about me playing semantics. You are correct, he never denied it was a terrorist attack. That I am alright with, ever respect. But he continued to claim that the video had something to do with and even claimed that it was a spontaneous attack.

[Gaspar]

Talk about me playing semantics. You are correct, he never denied it was a terrorist attack. That I am alright with, ever respect. But he continued to claim that the video had something to do with and even claimed that it was a spontaneous attack.

Beyond that he was careful to send out ambassador Rice to all of the networks to push the video line and insulate himself and members of his cabinate from scrutiny on the issue.  Continued to push the video line even when addressing the crowd in front of the coffins of the fallen. 

Had he acknowledged that they knew this was a terrorist attack against the US, he would have had to cancel his big NV fundraiser, and he needs Nevada money!

[Townsend]

White House Defends Changing Rhetoric On Libya Attack

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/white-house-defends-changing-rhetoric-on-libya-attack/

The White House today rejected criticism of the Obama administration's response and changing rhetoric regarding the deadly Sept. 11 assault on the U.S. consulate in Libya as "unfortunate" attempts to politicize the attack.

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the president is "absolutely focused on finding out exactly what happened."

GOP nominee Mitt Romney has noted the administration's rhetorical evolution – from saying the attack was a spontaneous act to now admitting that it was an act of terrorism – and accused the president of not wanting to "level with the American people" or come "clean" with what really happened in assault.

"There has been an attempt by Republicans, beginning with Governor Romney, to try to turn this event into a partisan issue-to try to score political points out of a terrorist attack that cost the lives of four Americans including our ambassador to Libya. And that is unfortunate," Carney told reporters today.

The White House initially linked the attack to broader protests in the region sparked by an amateur anti-Islamic movie. "We have no information to suggest that it was a preplanned attack," Carney told reporters on September 14. "The unrest we've seen around the region has been in reaction to a video that Muslims, many Muslims find offensive. And while the violence is reprehensible and unjustified, it is not a reaction to the 9/11 anniversary that we know of, or to U.S. policy."

Two weeks later, however, the White House says the president believes the assault was a "terrorist attack," a term Obama has not used in his descriptions of the violence.
"I'm the president's spokesman," Carney said today. "It has been since I said so, the president's position that this is a terrorist attack."

The president conceded Monday in an interview on ABC's "The View" that "there is no doubt that the kind of weapons that were used, the on-going assault, that it wasn't just a mob action."
Asked why the president declined to publicly describe the violence as a terrorist attack, Carney said he was "simply answering a question."

"He bases his judgments on matters like this on the assessments that he's provided by the intelligence community," he said.

–Mary Bruce, Ann Compton, Jon Garcia

So there's that for you to tear apart if you want.

[nathanm]

But he continued to claim that the video had something to do with and even claimed that it was a spontaneous attack.

Keep up the spin. I find it pleasantly distracting.

[Conan71]

White House Defends Changing Rhetoric On Libya Attack

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/09/white-house-defends-changing-rhetoric-on-libya-attack/

So there's that for you to tear apart if you want.

Carney would have been much more honest if he would have simply said:

"The president is absolutely focused on his re-election campaign and cannot be bothered with the daily minutia of his job."

[nathanm]

Oh good, you survived. 

[nathanm]

Some might find this interesting: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/tue-september-25-2012/king-abdullah-ii-of-jordan-pt--1

Stewart let loose with some surprisingly uncomfortable questions for HRH.

[swake]

Uh, where in that story does it say that Bush was the one who over-rode DF's strategy?

If Bush wasn't the one making that call, then his was an even worse presidency then what we all think it was.

I am not saying he made the wrong call, the facts on the ground are usually not all the facts. Looking at his presidency overall it was most likely a bad call but I won't claim to know that. But then killing Bin Laden that fast might have stopped Bush from being able to invade Iraq........  Bush did say that he didn't care about getting Bin Laden just a few months later.

[Gaspar]

Bush is Obama's license, crutch, and addiction. 

Unfortunately, it seems he is also the foundation for his policys. 

Swake, enough with all the "but Bush. . ."

We can't continue to allow our leaders to use the precedent of failure as an excuse for continued failure.