On Benghazi, the debate and ‘acts of terror’
The most dramatic moment of last night’s debate came when Mitt Romney insisted that President Obama had not immediately called the deadly attack on our consulate in Benghazi an act of terror. Obama just as boldly insisted that he had, and for a moment it appeared as if the two men were about to bet $10,000, if not the presidency itself, on the outcome of their disagreement.
The moment passed quickly when moderator Candy Crowley stepped in to rule Obama correct and Romney incorrect, a step that conservatives are condemning harshly this morning as evidence of liberal bias.
Let’s unpack this whole piece of baggage, starting from the beginning:
1.) The premise of the entire debate is false, because the attack on our consulate in Benghazi was not an act of terror. An act of terror, by definition, targets the civilian population and attempts to inflict terror on that population. This was a military operation/assassination, targeted not at civilians but at the top American presence in Libya and, indirectly, at the armed guards who protected that presence. It was an attack on the United States and its interests.
Calling it an act of terror confuses the issue. However, we prefer that confusion. That confusion allows us to place this attack safely within our preferred War on Terror narrative and casts America as the innocent victim of nefarious, brutal men rather than as a major player contending for some share of power and influence in Libya, which is what we are.
September 11 was an act of terror. The truck bombing that killed 241 Marines in their barracks in Lebanon in 1983 was not an act of terror. Attacks on our forces in Afghanistan are not acts of terror. And neither was this.
2.) The Obama administration, for reasons that remain unclear, balked at calling it either an act of terror or a direct military operation. They initially preferred a third category, describing it as a mass protest that got out of hand. And while that characterization may have reflected initial and incorrect intelligence about the attack, they clung to that characterization long after it had become clear that it was false.
I have no idea why they did that. Maybe the facts changed more quickly than a sluggish bureaucracy was able to change its story. Maybe they were reluctant to admit to Libyans and the world that the facility targeted in the attack also served as a CIA outpost. The Republicans argue that the administration was attempting to hide its own security failing, but frankly that makes no sense either. The basic security arrangements that were needed to protect the Benghazi consulate from direct military attack would also have helped to protect it from an angry, unruly mob. Under either story line, those arrangements failed.
In fact, protecting that facility and its occupants from an attack of this sort — a coordinated, concerted assault by numerous well-armed fighters — would require security levels well beyond those needed to fend off a mob. So again, I am mystified as to why the administration was so slow to alter its story.
One other note: A lot has been made of the fact that the attack came on the anniversary of Sept. 11. I don’t doubt that the date made the operation more attractive to attackers. However, if they had gotten a shot at Ambassador Chris Stevens on Sept. 12 or Oct. 12, I suspect they would have taken it. He was that important to U.S. efforts to influence Libya’s future.
3.) If you nonetheless buy the argument that it was important to mislabel this an act of terror, then Romney and his fellow Republicans have a small point in claiming that the president and the Obama administration failed to do so.
The Obama administration likewise has a small point that he did do so.
Here’s what the president had to say in the Rose Garden the day after the attacks, in context:
“As Americans, let us never, ever forget that our freedom is only sustained because there are people who are willing to fight for it, to stand up for it, and in some cases, lay down their lives for it. Our country is only as strong as the character of our people and the service of those both civilian and military who represent us around the globe.
No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for. Today we mourn four more Americans who represent the very best of the United States of America. We will not waver in our commitment to see that justice is done for this terrible act. And make no mistake, justice will be done.”
As you can see, Obama did refer to the violence in Libya as acts of terror, so the Democrats are right. But he did so briefly and indirectly, and for days afterward his administration inexplicably continued to try to sell the mob-violence narrative, so the Republicans are right as well. It is, in the end, an open question, which means that Crowley was probably wrong to interject herself on it so definitively.
4.) None of this matters much, or should matter much. Stevens is still dead. Libya is still fractious. The United States still faces years if not decades of difficult work in the Middle East. The Arab world remains convulsive as it attempts to achieve many centuries of modernization in a matter of mere decades. The fact that the two campaigns are squabbling so bitterly over such relatively small distinctions suggests just how constrained our foreign policy options really are at this point. Neither side has a major point to make, so they focus on minor ones.
Despite his aggressive talk and the neo-con Hall of Fame that he has gathered to advise him, for example, Romney cannot identify a single policy step that he would have taken differently in the Middle East, Iraq or Afghanistan. This supposed “controversy”, along with worn-out phrases such as “apology tour” and “leading from behind,” is designed to mask that reality and make small things appear large.
We have more important things to talk about.
– Jay Bookman
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
277 comments Add your comment
curious
October 17th, 2012
9:37 am
Call Obama incompetent, but Romney is so wishy-washy noone knows what they’ll get if he is elected.
Either the Country will go down the tubes or a lot of Conservatives are going to be mad.
As far as $1.89/gallon gas, at that point, with our economy sinking faster than the Titanic, the oil companies were about to begin paying us to use gas.
Tom Middleton
October 17th, 2012
9:38 am
Jay, Mitt Romney is the duly elected salespuke-in-chief for some truly tied-and-discredited ideas, and just about everything his Neocon advisers can come up with will qualify in this regard.
So it’s not surprising he would try to exploit the tragic events in Libya by rushing to a camera and saying what he did. But neither is it surprising that the president, as soon as he could, would try to address both them and Mitt within that very same context.
Sometimes we can’t see clearly without a little time and distance between us and what we’re trying to understand. But even then in the larger context of an anything-but-the-truth campaign opponent, what Mitt Romney really is the most, we almost never will reach the luxury of a single view.
I will stay with the president on this in whatever way he chooses to describe it. I know his heart and I know his soul, and I know from months of watching Mitt Romney that he basically has neither!
Joseph
October 17th, 2012
9:38 am
JamVet:
I realize your getting defensive because Obama’s reign is about to end with a thud but relax. Romney is here to take care of you….
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
9:39 am
Your ongoing comments do in fact lean heavy toward Obama…
You simply assume that I lean heavily towards Obama. I am simply anti-Romney, as I think he was and is a much worse option when trying to replace Obama. I guess you missed my statement on why the other two candidates are not being heard at the debates, huh?
The reason I didn’t watch the first debate was because it did not involve the F-O-U-R candidates that will appear on the ballot here. The crap we’re discussing now is just that, crap. There are better infomercials that come on late at night when compared to these “debates”. The only thing I’ve said pro-Obama is that he actually showed emotion last night. I’m sure you’ve never seen me credit him for having the spine of a sour gummi bear either, right?
As I said, IF you wish to play that strawman game of telling me what I think or believe, I have no problem with scrolling by you. If you wish to debate with me, then all you have to do is ask me what I think or believe instead of trying to tell me that. It is a complete insult to me for a complete stranger to try to tell me what I think when you know nothing about me beyond what’s been said on this blog.
There is no arrogance at play in blocking you at all. It’s simply that I control my life, not those around me.
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
9:42 am
TaxPayer
I’ve heard that speech a few times. It is what it is. I’m not here to make friends or force anybody to think as I do.
Joseph
October 17th, 2012
9:42 am
Look like the AJC poll has Romney the easy victor….
Donovan
October 17th, 2012
9:42 am
You can spin it anyway you want to, but the fact remains that 4 people were murdered, which includes the ambassador of Libya, due to inadequate security. That inadequate security was the result of denied requests for more protection from State under the Obama regime. Not even was the upcoming anniversary of 9/11 taken into consideration. How do you say, Incompetence?
Parsing the words of terrorism and military attack have no bearing on the argument of coverup and incompetence. This is deflection of the true facts and reminiscent of the Clinton coverup with Monica Lewinski. Remember how the definition of sex was parsed back then? When Democrats get their hands caught in the cookie jar they compound their guilt with Bookman deflections and smoke-and-mirrors. And we want 4 more years of this kind of nonsense?
I think that the last debate on foreign policy will be quite telling and decisive in removing the emporor’s clothes once and for all.
Mick
October 17th, 2012
9:43 am
I think president obama was on point most of the night without…….a teleprompter, can we now finally dismiss that silliest of canards???
The other half of your brain.
October 17th, 2012
9:43 am
Jay is correct, We have more important things to talk about,
Like 16 Trillion in debt.
Like 23 Million people out of work.
Like Billions wasted on fake energy.
Like no immigration policy, these are just a few.
I would like to address the fact that Hillary & Obama both took responsibility for the 4 Americans getting murdered on U.S. soil ( Embassy )
Shouldn’t they be tried for second degree murder? If you caused someone to be murdered what would be the consequences?
To say you are responsible and nothing happens to you is an outrage and if anyone feels differently then you have a few screws loose.
straitroad
October 17th, 2012
9:44 am
I wish someone would explain obama’s tax issue. He advocates raising taxes to the Clinton era rates. Democrats held both houses of congress for the first two years of his term but he did not propose the tax increase at that time. Is there a logical explanation for this?
RB from Gwinnett
October 17th, 2012
9:44 am
What in the world are they still investigating??? It was a terrorist attack, it was not about some video nobody has seen to this day, and the administration can’t get it’s story straight. What’s left to investigate?
Joseph
October 17th, 2012
9:45 am
Many of Jay’s die hard followers are MIA this morning… I guess the’re licking their wounds. Poor libs… Don’t worry.. There’s only one more debate to stomach through and then I’ll all be over….
East Cobb RINO, Inc. (LLC)
October 17th, 2012
9:47 am
Once again Romney was given every opportunity to provide details about his tax plan and drifted off into generalities and bovine fecal matter. But this much he has said:
1) Across the board 20% cuts to be offset by eliminating undisclosed deductions and loopholes
2) Wealthy people will not pay more than they currently pay now
3) Middle class will pay less
4) Will not add to deficit
These 4 undisputed points about the Romney/Ryan tax plan cannot be reconciled unless:
1) To make up for 3 & 4, the poor and lower class will pay more – how republican of them
2) All Federal spending is cut roughly in half – Greece anyone?
3) The economy grows at 25% annually – unicorns for everyone too!
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 17th, 2012
9:48 am
TAXPAYER
I’m flattered you are so interested in which label I wear…Obama needs to go, Romney needs to vanish…it doesn’t matter…
I rest in comfort knowing that you take the time to consider every issue and make up your own mind accordingly…debating with you is like debating with a less educated Jay Carney..
Mick
October 17th, 2012
9:48 am
donovan
If you are seriously concerned about security and its aftermath, one question; What’s your take on the 9-11 attack with all the warnings that were out there but ignored? Was the previous administration incompetent also? What about that presidential brief? Mushroom clouds in the same sentence with iraq? WMD? none found just to jog your memory, now that defines incompetence…
Paul
October 17th, 2012
9:49 am
None of this matters much… The fact that the two campaigns are squabbling so bitterly over such relatively small distinctions suggests just how constrained our foreign policy options really are at this point. Neither side has a major point to make, so they focus on minor ones.
That’s the real point in all this. But, in politics, at the end of a campaign, you don’t just dance with the one that brought you, you dance with the only other person not dancing.
“Whatever the reasons were that the administration inexplicably continued to try to sell the mob-violence narrative, it sure has the appearance that it was a political calculation and not a strategic or security based calculation.
Because a spontaneous demonstration is just that – it arises quickly. If there is any advance indication, it’s likely too short to be able to take any countermeasures. A planned attack that succeeds, however, can be portrayed as an intelligence failure, a leadership failure, as ineptness in seeing what’s going on and what’s coming.
JamVet
October 17th, 2012
9:50 am
Romney win this election?
BWAHAHAHA!!
Jo jo, you are a bookie’s wet dream come true.
I presume you have bet the next few month’s rent money on Mittens. Still VERY favorable odds for him, ya know.
2/1 as of this morning. (Obama is 4/11)
Easy money, LOL!
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
9:51 am
Democrats held both houses of congress for the first two years of his term but he did not propose the tax increase at that time. Is there a logical explanation for this?
There was the high pitched whine from the Right about not raising taxes during a recession. Democrats held both houses, but they didn’t have enough votes to overcome the filibuster or threat of a filibuster. Had it been my decision, I would have let them all reset on the day they were supposed to. Tax cuts don’t create demand, and raising taxes will end up happening at some point as we don’t have the job base to generate enough revenue to pay down the debt.
alex
October 17th, 2012
9:51 am
@rb, Read the FP article referred to by jay, If one is to believe THAT article, then investigate who is to blame for the horrible security at the compound… Terror or not, our ambasador was not protected and someone should be held to account !
Aside < I am pleased that The president has a pulse , it gives meaning to the existence of brosephus, jamvet ,the granny, jay, chris mathews,andrew sullivan,and the state of ohio…..ONWARD BUCKEYES,FORWARD…..
tiredofIT
October 17th, 2012
9:52 am
It is obvious that Mitt only cares about one thing and that is himself. He not running because of his love for this country and wanting to serve. It’s just another trophy too him. Romney and his type are the problem, not the solution.
Paul
October 17th, 2012
9:52 am
RB from Gwinnett
” It was a terrorist attack”
Did you even read Jay’s couple of paragraphs defining what a terrorist attack is and what it isn’t?
How about you tell us by what definition what happened in Benghazi was a terrorist attack?
Georgia
October 17th, 2012
9:52 am
I have a hangover this morning because I took a vodka shot every time Romney’s mouthguard got knocked out of his mouth and clear across the ring. Romney’s jaw is wired shut this morning, and I heard he had a late dinner last night through a straw. OMG. the humanity.
indigo
October 17th, 2012
9:52 am
“none of this matters much”
This is the heart of the matter. Republicans are making this attack sound like another 9/11 and all Obama’s fault. Neither is true.
Our world is a dangerous place and will not get any safer in the foreseeable future. American citizens abroad, whether civilian or Govt., are and will continue to be potential targets for Muslim terrorists. No American President, Obama or Romney or anyone else, will be able to change this.
I wonder how many voters are unable to see thru this flimsy Republican charade?
Stevie Ray..Clowns to the left and Jokers to the right..here I am...
October 17th, 2012
9:53 am
BRO,
There is no shortage of interpreting others position…on that stage last night or here in this an other biased forums…
Strawman…nice touch..
Welcome to the Occupation
October 17th, 2012
9:53 am
The Arab world remains convulsive as it attempts to achieve many centuries of modernization in a matter of mere decades
Strange statement, considering the West got much of its own “modernization” though the Arab world. Truth is the Arab world has already been “modernized” in many ways large and small throughout the period that we call “modernity”, but Western influence and sabotage has in many cases reversed that modernization, deliberately destabilizing the very forces of modernization and secularization to serve its own ends. But you’re right, Jay, to make the distinction concerning terrorism and the attempt to paint ourselves as innocent victims when in effect we are lodged in a foreign country where, once again, we are trying to engineer events to suit out own needs, not necessarily what is best for that country or region.
USA Patriot
October 17th, 2012
9:55 am
We have more important things to talk about.
– Jay Bookman
Yep, the Million Muppet March, contraception for women, war on women, you didn’t build that, blah, blah, blah, blah! Screw national security, forget about a nuclear Iran, deficit -only up 9.9% -ha!
Dunwoody Granny
October 17th, 2012
9:55 am
straitroad, perhaps you might recall that during the first two years of Obama’s administration, banks were failing, companies were going bankrupt, unemployment claims were exploding, there were massive numbers of home foreclosures, and it looked like we were about to slide into a second Great Depression. No one was even faintly concerned about the deficit when it looked as if everyone was soon going to be jobless and broke. It wasn’t a good time to raise taxes. Later, when it was time to reauthorize the Bush tax cut, Obama tried mightily to exclude the cuts for top earners, but the Rs told him if the rich didn’t get to keep their cuts, no one else did, either.
stands for decibels
October 17th, 2012
9:55 am
“Wahh! the video! they said it was the video and we got all excited in the right blogosphere because it gave us a new excuse to hate on brown mooozelums, and then they said it wasn’t!”
That’s one great campaign talking point to take with you these last three weeks. Have fun with it, guys. I’m sure you won’t seem needy or pathetic at all.
Kevin
October 17th, 2012
9:57 am
Obama was reluctant to call it a terrorists attack, because he seems to believe that we might hurt someone’s feelings if we do so. It takes backbone to call the enemy out (for instance, Reagan calling the USSR an Evil Empire) and BHO has none.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
9:58 am
DownInAlbany — “Obama really needed to knock Romney out last night and that did not happen.”
So Candy Crowley knocked Romney out instead.
Goldie
October 17th, 2012
9:58 am
The New York Times article, Oct. 15– Witnesses in Libya clearly state that there was a mob response to the anti-Muslim video on that day in Libya:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/10/16/world/africa/election-year-stakes-overshadow-nuances-of-benghazi-investigation.html?_r=0
["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. 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. "]
So still lots of confusion about what occurred and who is responsible, but I believe Our President when he says that he will track down who killed 4 Americans that day and bring them to justice!
mm
October 17th, 2012
9:59 am
Romney put women in their place last night. In a “binder”. I didn’t think it was possible to top the stupidity of his 47% disaster.
Georgia
October 17th, 2012
9:59 am
It’s still too early for any temporary surge in the polls to be definitive. There is still a third debate. Who is the moderator for that? Last night revealed how crucial the behavior of the moderator is. Candy or Jim? No! Perhaps a timed mic that shuts off at two minutes is needed. Didn’t the audience’s mic shut off after each question last night?
Which brings up the audience’s questions and the demeanor of the people asking the questions. Thats America Folks. Love it or leave it.
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
9:59 am
alex: I am pleased that The president has a pulse , it gives meaning to the existence of brosephus
Are you always that wrong? Obama having a pulse does nothing towards my existence. I’ve lived through several presidents and will probably see quite a few more. I don’t trust him any more than I can throw him, and that’s how I feel about any and all politicians. Thanks for your concern though, but my existence has more to do with my family and me than anybody else.
stands for decibels
October 17th, 2012
10:00 am
because he seems to believe that we might hurt someone’s feelings
Yeah, there’s another winning talking point–convince Americans that the guy they saw on their TeeVees last night is timid and shy about hurt feefees. Run that play a few more times.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:00 am
RB — “What in the world are they still investigating??? It was a terrorist attack, it was not about some video nobody has seen to this day, and the administration can’t get it’s story straight. What’s left to investigate?”
Right. The only thing we can do at this point is the same thing Reagan did after the Lebanon barracks bombing and the deaths of all those Marines.
Cut and run.
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:01 am
mm
Why is it stupid to say Romney’s administration went to various womens’ organizations, asked them for lists of qualified people to serve at the top echelons and they sent back binders full of candidates, resumes and recommendations?
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
10:01 am
Stevie Ray
You can interpret all day, but unless you ask me, there is little guarantee that you will be right about me. It’s much easier to ask as opposed to playing the guessing game. However, I can’t tell you what to do or how to live your life. So, you simply be you and nothing else.
redneckbluedog
October 17th, 2012
10:03 am
ATTENTION GUN OWNERS…Mitt Romney wants to take your weapons..!! He did the same thing is Massachusetts..!!!
He wants to turn America into one big cultist colony, where all you can do is ride bikes, wear black neckties, and worship Joseph Smith. Forget about your Copenhagen, your Jack Daniels, and your daughters. They belong to him now..!!! This is EXACTLY why they ran him out of Massachusetts..!!!!
DebbieDoRight - A Do Right Woman
October 17th, 2012
10:03 am
Taxpayer: How dare Mitt be called out for his lies by a mere female moderator.
LOL!
Bro: I think Romney was close to getting a good old fashioned Chicago ass whooping last night.
If only………………. sigh…………
Welcome to the Occupation
October 17th, 2012
10:04 am
Dunwoody Granny: ‘was soon going to be jobless and broke”
Or waiting in bread lines or lines to get a tiny voucher of cash because the bank where your account was went under and the ATMs don’t work.
Why would our friend straightroad recall such things when he can just join the rest of his mates in the kindergarten of ‘conservative thought’ and pretend that none of it ever happened ? He has a perfectly well oiled amnesia machine in the conservative media that is ready to assist him in his mystification whenever he needs it, which is daily.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:04 am
USA Patriot — “Screw national security, forget about a nuclear Iran”
Right, because GOP policy is to pay lots of attention to countries that *don’t* have nuclear weapons — like Iraq and Iran — and *ignore* the ones that DO — like North Korea.
Goldie
October 17th, 2012
10:04 am
Attentions Cons — now your guy Mitt supports affirmative action in hiring!
BWAAAAAAA!
Rightwing Troll
October 17th, 2012
10:05 am
“This fool will get us all killed if we’re not protecting ourselves. Get your heads out of the sand, you clueless libs! Amen, Bill”
Ohhh nooos!!!… here come the brown skinned people… quick everybody hide under your beds like BOW…
Did you know Iran is building a bomb? Yeah, it’s sooooo big… (how big is it Bill??!?)… it’s big enough to blowed up the whole world…
Obama’s gonna win this election and come and take yer guns… personally… he’s yer worst nightmare… a ni&&er with a badge… (no offense there Bro…)…
Hank
October 17th, 2012
10:05 am
The President seems to think that you can lie to the American people and they won’t know the difference. I know what he and his administration really said and spent considerable time blaming it on a video. Why? Because he has a failed foreign policy. The notion that no one asked for security is beyond belief. First of all if you have American diplomats anywhere in Lybia do you really need someone to tell you that security is needed. This administration has never leveled with the American people and never will. Crowley was there to protect the President. She could not remain impartial and had to inject herself into the debate in the same way she does on CNN. She is the best example of a media that is in the tank for Obama. I once was quite moderate but this President has changed all that and he will not get my vote.
Georgia
October 17th, 2012
10:06 am
How about that long closeup of Romney’s face as he looked at Candy after he asked her if Obama’s premise was that he called it an act of terror in the rose garden. That’s must see TV. You could feel the power slipping out of his hands as he waited and said nothing and let the moment pass. That was the crux of the night. Romney let all the openings expire. He should have just fired that torpedo. “Obama did NOT say it was an act of terror. He blamed the video. He just lied. He’s a liar. Don’t vote for a liar. I promise one thing, America. I will never lie to you like Obozo just did.”
That was the road to the white house. That was the sling shot against the goliath. That was the post pattern wide open for a touchdown. That was the walk off pinch hit homerun.
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012
10:06 am
Does anyone care about the report that is yet to come out or just looking to score political points?
I haven’t read a post with definitive information stating that even with an increased security detail the attack would have been thwarted.
I have read speculation on both sides, but no definitive information.
Kelly Rhaods
October 17th, 2012
10:07 am
I would like to ask Mr. Bookman to open up a dictionary or look up a definition. Go to google and type in the search “Define: terrorism” the definition is “The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.” Last time I checked killing political figures was usually in the pursuit of political aims. Could you share where you received your education Mr. Bookman, I want to make sure my children do not go there.
Ms. Lum
October 17th, 2012
10:08 am
we are all osama obama
We Are All Osama Obama
WE ARE ALL OSAMA OBAMA!
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:08 am
Hank — “Crowley was there to protect the President. She could not remain impartial”
Why, if she hadn’t been so all-fired biased toward the truth, she’d *never* have corrected Romney when he lied like that.
mm
October 17th, 2012
10:09 am
Foreclosures are at a 5 year low.
Homebuilding is at a 4 year high.
The stock market has doubled.
Yeah,ask me if we’re better off than we were 4 years ago.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:10 am
K. Rhaods — ” Last time I checked killing political figures was usually in the pursuit of political aims.”
Last time I checked, an ambassador wasn’t a political figure.
Ambassadors are *appointed,* not elected. And Jon Huntsman, one of the GOP candidates for President, was *Obama’s* Ambassador to China. If ambassadors were political, Republican Huntsman would never have been appointed by Democratic Obama, now would he?
Be sure and let me know where *you* got *your* education, k?
Rightwing Troll
October 17th, 2012
10:11 am
“The Romney Obama/Crowley debate was fun to watch I will admit. I like aggression & Candy I mean Obama was on it…”
Polls are up, it must mean they’re skewed and full of liberal bias… polls are down, proof positive beyond question that Mittens is cruising to a landslide… Win the first debate… top of the world, strongest man, etc…, lose the second debate… Moderator had it in the bag for Obama…
At least wingnuts are consistent in their inconsistency and sense of victimization…
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
10:11 am
They BOTH: Does anyone care about the report that is yet to come out or just looking to score political points?
Do you really, really even need to ask that question??
I haven’t seen any reports myself. Based on what I’ve read, I’m not sure if we will get a true idea of what happened. It took so long for FBI investigators to get to the site, that I’m not sure if they will be able to put the puzzle back together fast enough to satisfy our instant gratification society.
Goldie
October 17th, 2012
10:12 am
Maybe if Ole Mitt would stop regurgitating the same lies he hears from the Fox Noise channel, he would not look so foolish on the debate stage in front of millions of Americans — oh well!
JamVet
October 17th, 2012
10:13 am
So apparently Ms. Crowley gang banged Mitt Romney?
Wow.
I’m lovin’ this Con Cabernet Sauvignon from Crybaby Vineyards this morning…
Welcome to the Occupation
October 17th, 2012
10:14 am
Kelly Rhaods: “Go to google and type in the search “Define: terrorism” the definition is “The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.”
Yeah, good point, Kelly. But you realize, don’t you, that under that definition the United States is perhaps the most terrorist nation on earth?
Goldie
October 17th, 2012
10:16 am
America can rest safely while Our President is in office, knowing that he will not lead us into unneccesary foreign wars and occupations… we have confidence that he knows how to go after the criminals who really commit these crimes against Americans!
Obama/Biden 2012!
Jay
October 17th, 2012
10:16 am
“The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.”
So by that definition, Kelly, U.S. troops in Afghanistan are terrorists. Is that what you’re saying? They are certainl using violence pursue political aims.
If anybody who uses violence to achieve political ends is a terrorist, then George Bush was a terrorist in invading Iraq, correct? The U.S. and NATO were terrorists in using violence to oust Gaddhafi, correct?
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:17 am
Morning, Goldie
From The Boston Globe: “. In February 2004, 10 of the 20 top positions in Romney’s administration were filled by women, including lieutenant governor Kerry Healey. ”
Kelly Rhaods
“. Go to google and type in the search “Define: terrorism” the definition is…The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.”
That’s an illustration of why a simple, one-line definition is probably not the best starting point and ending point for such a concept. By that definition, Pres Roosevelt and PR Churchill were terrorists and WWII was a terrorist action.
willie lynch
October 17th, 2012
10:17 am
So if the administration had said this was an act of terror 4 days after it happened, what would have changed in what has happened since?
Goldie
October 17th, 2012
10:17 am
“I’m lovin’ this Con Cabernet Sauvignon from Crybaby Vineyards this morning…”
JamVet Dude — bwaaaaa!
RB from Gwinnett
October 17th, 2012
10:18 am
Hey Paul, why don’t you go split hairs about semantics with somebody else while the adults discuss the actual issues. Run along now…
Trolls Bane
October 17th, 2012
10:19 am
All this smoke misses the fire …
Did anyone happen to catch where Mittens promised the middle class a tax cut if he gets elected? Talk about a blatant vote buying attempt … hey buddy I’ll give you $1000 to vote for me!
Of course a supposed successful business man apparently does not understand basic economics when it comes to the federal budget …
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
October 17th, 2012
10:20 am
Next Monday Obama is going to hold Romney down and cut his hair.
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012
10:20 am
Bro
I knew the answers would be sparse and partisan, however I still had to ask.
I do not know enough about the events of incident or the procedures and protocol (I’m sure it isn’t the same for each embassy) to say the attack could have been thwarted or not.
Maybe it could have, but I don’t have the details and surely not the answers.
Some of our fellow bloggers seem to know all the facts, but are just not sharing their “sources”. At least their assessments would lead one to believe they have all or most of the facts.
This politicizing of the incident is insane.
Pass the Cheesy Grits Please
October 17th, 2012
10:21 am
Yeah, good point, Kelly. But you realize, don’t you, that under that definition the United States is perhaps the most terrorist nation on earth?
I wonder why those people hate us anyway.
Maybe its the 100,000 or so civilians we killed in Iraq ?
Nah. I just think they hate us for our freedoms. LOL
Mighty Righty
October 17th, 2012
10:22 am
So the Democrat talking point is that this is not a terrorist attack in spite of the fact that subsequently several Democrats including the president eventually called it a “terrorist attack” after having lied about it for three weeks calling it a spontaneous demonstration that got out of hand. Now Jay is saying it was really an act of war to which we have not responded! I am confused. The Democrats still to this day nearly a month later have no clue as to what happened and they had a representive of their State Department on the phone during the attack getting a live report that it was not repeat no a spontaneous demonstration that go out of control. The Administration “COVER UP” began immediately. Too bad their response to preventing it wasn’t nearly as swift as their lying spin. It is clear one of two things happened. Either this administration is still lying or it is incompetent. For goodness sakes this was not the first attack on our embassy in Libya. There were two attacks on our embassy in June and our ambassador was so concerned he asked for additional security which was turned down by the Obama administration. Meanwhile, the “COVER UP” continues. Part of their “COVER UP” is manifested in their appointing a commission to study what happened! Can anyone remember a government commission who ever accomplished anything except waste our money. If Obama were in charge of the Atlanta Police Department, every time a murder happened he would appoint a commission to study it. Comeon people, wake up. Four of our fellow citizens are dead as a direct result of the inaction of this administration no matter what word the left would prefer to use to describe it, terrorist, war, riot, or stupidity. The administation was caught with its pants down and it and its friends in the media are doing everything they can to hide the truth from we the american people.
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:22 am
RB from Gwinnett 10:18
Which, being interpreted is, “I completely ignored Jay’s point so I could hold fast to my partisan views and to prove how great my understanding is, I’ll insult anyone who challenges me, thus demonstrating to the entire blog I’m a manly man alpha male.”
Welcome to the Occupation
October 17th, 2012
10:24 am
Cheesy Grits: Our drones brings lots of fear. And you don’t have to be a so-called “militant” to prefer not to have them filling the skies over your land.
But terrorist doesn’t count as a descriptor because we’re the West and we’re “modern” and “advanced”.
Peadawg
October 17th, 2012
10:24 am
“Yeah,ask me if we’re better off than we were 4 years ago.”
Hell all I have to do is look at all the construction going on around Athens to know we’re doing better.
RB from Gwinnett
October 17th, 2012
10:25 am
Hank, “The President seems to think that you can lie to the American people and they won’t know the difference”
Read the comments here hank. It should be pretty clear he’s getting away with it with quite a few of his sheep including Bookman.
willie lynch
October 17th, 2012
10:26 am
Mighty Righty
October 17th, 2012
10:22 am
What are they covering up?
Oscar
October 17th, 2012
10:28 am
Romney appeared to be a confused and desperate man, looking defeated and wondering why, and picking at small points and trying to score points on irrelavant matters.
JamVet
October 17th, 2012
10:28 am
Finn, hysterical.
Is he gonna get Candy to sit on the otherwise manly Mittens???
And niiiiiice smackdown of the Loganville lout, Paul…
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
October 17th, 2012
10:28 am
“…………. because the attack on our consulate in Benghazi was not an act of terror”
Well, well, well …………. what would Jay call the attack on the USS Cole, the Marine Barracks in Lebanon or the Ft. Hood Massacre for that matter?
Two points:
1) Our ambassador was a “CIVILIAN”.
2) Even military attacks can be acts of terror – the Nazi’s were quite adept at that.
Good grief !
P.S.
I suppose under Jay’s warped, politically correct definition that the attack on the World Trade Center was an act of terror but the attack against the Pentagon was not?
Right Jay ???
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:28 am
morning, BOTH suck
“I do not know enough about the events of incident or the procedures and protocol (I’m sure it isn’t the same for each embassy) to say the attack could have been thwarted or not. ”
Testimony before Rep Issa’s committee, Eric Nordstrom, State Department regional security officer, said something Issa blew by, that even if everything they asked for had been fully implemented, it would not have been enough to repel the attack.
“A key Congressional witness conceded Wednesday that even with heightened security measures, it may not have been enough to stop the dozens of armed terrorists from storming the U.S. consulate in Benghazi and killing U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans.”
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2012/10/10/witness-says-additional-security-may-not-have-stopped-benghazi-attack
indigo
October 17th, 2012
10:29 am
“and make no mistake, justice will be done”
Suppose there was a Libyan embassy here in America. Further suppose armed Americans stormed the place and killed the Libyan Ambasador and three other men.
If the President of Libya said he would have the killers hunted down and killed and strongly implied Libyans would come to America and do the job, what do you think the American response would be?
Just asking.
Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)
October 17th, 2012
10:29 am
Something about Mormons and “binders full of women” doesn’t sound good.
RB from Gwinnett
October 17th, 2012
10:29 am
Paul, go debate the definition of “is” with somebody who cares.
Got it?
Brosephus™
October 17th, 2012
10:29 am
They BOTH
There’s a difference in the security procedures for Embassies and Consulates. If I remember correctly, Marines are part of the security forces at Embassies as well as DSS (Diplomatic Security Service), but I don’t think Marines are used at Consulates. There are other differences too, such as physical security designs and such.
Oscar
October 17th, 2012
10:30 am
manly man alpha male.”
———
That’s what Romney tries to be. Doesn’t work. We need someone who can listen and focus on the main issues as President. Not an agressive bully who wants his on way regardless.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:31 am
On the advice of some of our regulars, my wife and I watched the post-debate roundup on FNC. And oh, man, did the whining and complaining start QUICK over there. It was pretty clear within a minute or two that the cons were upset about getting their collective hiney (complete with grill marks) handed to them.
JamVet
October 17th, 2012
10:32 am
Matz had the quote of the night over at Kyle’s:
I don’t always organize my women, but when I do, I use binders.
What a hoot.
Stay stupid, my con friends…
Oscar
October 17th, 2012
10:32 am
RB from Gwinnett
_____
I missed that whole “is” thing execpt for Clinton’s answer. What was the question he was asked. (I guess it could depend on the definition of what ”was” was.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:33 am
RB — “Got it?”
You’re cute when you act all rough n’ tough.
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012
10:33 am
Paul & Bro
Thanks for the information.
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:36 am
Both suck
Any time, Both. Appreciate a discussion with someone who begins with ‘I’m not knowledgeable about such and such. Anybody have any information that would be helpful?” attitude.
Joe Hussein Mama
October 17th, 2012
10:36 am
JamVet — “What a hoot.”
And you know Bill Clinton’s radar went off during the debate, too.
What? A whole BINDER full of women? How come I didn’t hear about it? And when am I gonna get to see it?
mm
October 17th, 2012
10:38 am
Wow, just saw a great new name for Romney.
Mittnocchio
stands for decibels
October 17th, 2012
10:38 am
about the binders where the
whitewomen wuz at…“Mitt Romney apparently got elected to be the governor of a state without personally knowing any women qualified to work in government.”
Keep Up the Good Fight!
October 17th, 2012
10:39 am
Are we talking D ring binders or something smaller?
stands for decibels
October 17th, 2012
10:39 am
skoolz SHEETZ.
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012
10:39 am
JHM
Slick Willy probably called Romney last night to see if he still had that “binder” laying around and if he didn’t mind sharing……….
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
October 17th, 2012
10:40 am
JAY’S HOMEWORK ASSIGNMENT:
Title 18, United States Code, Section 2113
“-STATUTE-
As used in this chapter –
(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that –
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that
are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of
any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed
within the jurisdiction of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended –
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of
the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they
appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which
their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;
(2) the term “national of the United States” has the meaning
given such term in section 101(a)(22) of the Immigration and
Nationality Act;
(3) the term “person” means any individual or entity capable of
holding a legal or beneficial interest in property;
(4) the term “act of war” means any act occurring in the course
of –
(A) declared war;
(B) armed conflict, whether or not war has been declared,
between two or more nations; or
(C) armed conflict between military forces of any origin; and
(5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that –
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be intended –
(i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) to influence the policy of a government by
intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass
destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of
the United States.”
Georgia
October 17th, 2012
10:40 am
We need to neutralize the moderators. It’s not fair to either party. Maybe we could use replacement moderators. Or maybe use one of those apes that knows sign language.
or Lassie. “What now, Lassie?” ruff ruff “I’m over my time limit?” ruff ruff “and I lied?” ruff ruff “There’s a kitty in the well?” ruff ruff
Mighty Righty
October 17th, 2012
10:41 am
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012it.
10:20 am
This politicizing of the incident is insane
The “incident” became political the minute the aministration lied about When the administration sent out its spokes people with a simutaneous concocted story to all of the media outlets it became political. When the administration made a video which it distributed to the muslim world repeating a lie about abd apologizing for an obscure video that no one had seen the administration made it political. When David Axelrod, who is a “politcal spokes person for the president” goes on national television for the sole purpose of squelching debate on the murder and injuries of american citizens it is political. This story became political when CNN found the ambassador’s log book several days after the terrorist attack and exposed the entry of ambassador Stephens expressing his concern for an attack on the embassy and requested additional security which was turned down. Our wonderful administration instead of trying to find out who screwed up publicly attacked CNN for reporting this information. That was political. WhenHillar Clinton stood infront of the casket of the dead americans and lied about the cause of their deaths was an obscure film. That was political. When the poor slob who made the controversial film was arrested by the Obamanazi brown shirts in the middle of the night, that was political.
0311/8541/5811/1811/1801
October 17th, 2012
10:43 am
Since Jay doesn’t “exchange” with me anymore the question in my 10:28 is open to anyone.
The suicide attack on the World Trade Center (civilian target) was an act of terrorism ……. yes/no ?
The suicide attack on the Pentagon (military target) was an act of terrorism ……. yes/no?
They BOTH suck
October 17th, 2012
10:46 am
Mighty Righty
Unless you are just being your typical self, you can plainly see that I did not exonerate the Administration, but carry on with another one of your diatribes if it makes you feel better about yourself.
Paul
October 17th, 2012
10:48 am
Scout
“5) the term “domestic terrorism” means activities that –
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation
of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;”
Well, by your interpretation based on what you cited, any Libyans involved in the attack need to be captured, read their Miranda rights and prosecute in US courts, as what they did violated the criminal laws of the United States.