Imagine the complexity...not just add-water. Probably unimaginable to folks who have always lived here in the U.S.

The terrible event had/has to be thoroughly investigated.

Nothing 'kind' about it.

CA ... you know everyonce in awhile your BS comments are tolerable. In this case not so.

The Ambassador died as did others and the Middle East is very problematic for ALL Americans, Republican and Democrats.

I for one do not want to see us in another war nor do I want to wee the situation escalate. I trust the President and Secretary of State.

Obama/Biden 2012

I hardly think it matters what the murderous act is called.....4 people were killed, and semantics seems to be the 'talking point'!

Disgusting display of nothingness!

Citizen 636050,

Try changing the dial on your mirror.

(It is YOUR candidate who has been chronicled as telling 533 lies in 33 weeks.)

So, maybe Obama SHOULD have cancelled his Vegas trip maybe? Talk about "shoot first, aim later"

So, why the cover up? Anyone could see it was a terrorist attack...

Today Carney repeated that the investigation into the Benghazi attack was “ongoing.” He continued that the administration has provided information “Not based on speculation, but based on what we know.”

This is how a president should operate, as opposed to Mitt Romney's jumping the gun on the issue to try to score political points.

Flapping his mouth didn't work out so well for Mitty.

Maybe someone ought to tell him that loose lips sink ships.

I admit that I know little of foreign affairs SS, however that doesn't answer my question... Why the cover up?

so......

Shoot first, Aim later -- really doesn't apply, does it??

The question is, whether this was the work of al-Qaida, or of militias trying to wrest control of the nascent Libyan government, and it would appear to be the latter. (I am sure they are investigating whether it was an assasination supported by Iran or Pakistan, as well.)

I believe the Obama administration is being careful to identify exactly who the perps were, so as to address the correct threat to our diplomats in the middle east. Not to the taste of the "shoot first, aim later" crowd, that's for sure, but more effective in the long run.

What they mean is that it is no longer politically advantageous to lie and say it was part of a protest.

This is the most pathetic president ever. They knew it was al-Qaida within 24 hours.

Romney was right all along.

.

Chilled

It mattered to you what it was called a whole lot last week. Now not so much. Last week it was a lie and you were part of the cover up. Of course you already knew that.

They didn't waste anytime coming out and stating it was spontaneous, not premeditated attack. They sent out Rice, and she repeatably told this story on all the Sunday shows.

Ambassador and three men killed, and its so happens to be on September 11th, in the middle east. What are the chances!

Starship Omamanation has deployed their deflector shields. And these are the verbal combatants who will quickly shoot down other posters as deflecting from articles at hand. This article states that after 15 days the POTUS now believes the killing of Americans was an act of terrorism...seems to be more than a bump in the road. Leadership from the Bridge? Captain Kirk, we need your leadership desperately... oh, wait, you're a ficitional character, crafted by writers...ah, just like our teleprompter president

Oh this is to good to be true. I guess the Pres administration just "acted stupidly".

Layton, no kidding an Ambassador was killed. But really, it was an act of terror? NO Sh*t it was. Im sorry Layton, you guys only tolerate if it fits nicely into your views.

Besides thetotas is right in her comment.

Mukwa— says

Chilled

It mattered to you what it was called a whole lot last week. Now not so much. Last week it was a lie and you were part of the cover up. Of course you already knew that.

Chilled says......Huh?

Chilled, perfectly said!

How ridiculous that we argue about semantics instead of grieving for the loss and sympathizing with the families of the lost. Argue semantics rather than discuss the complexities of the Middle East, the anger they feel whether justified or unjustified, the horrors of what happened. Petty nitpicking by both the media and the GOPers as far as I'm concerned. Instead of discussing what causes the anger at the US, the media wants to talk about what to call the result of that anger.

thetotas, really? That's ridiculous. The spokespeople provided information based on what was known at the time; based on what was happening elsewhere in the Middle East. Once the facts are linked, that initial information is subject to change.

The U.S. President's first job/response is to get Americans in troubled areas to safety. And look out for all Americans in the region.

Mitt Romney was too busy thinking about his own Me-Me hide to think about Americans abroad, still in harm's way.

On this recent event in Benghazi, the facts are very hard when you think of your GOP candidate's response -- and so will leave it at that.

What a brilliant statement from our great leader.. It took you this long to figure it out?

You are correct KB. The President has waited until the White House had all the facts instead of jumping out there and perhaps embarrassing himself like some other Presidential candidates I might mention (I'm looking at you Mitt).

This is the hallmark of a level-headed and prudent man who is not likely to blindly act no matter what the provocation. Lincoln had these qualities. Jefferson and Washington had these qualities. It's one of the reasons President Obama is a great President and will be re-elected.

Unlike the low-information ditto-heads, the majority of Americans know the President is the right man for the job and the GOP is the reason we are not further along on the road to recovery. Don't believe me? Just look at the polls.

Oh right, they don't believe in polls, or facts, just rhetoric and whatever their red-faced, fat, messiahs preach from hate radio.

Well, they better get on board or the train is going to leave the station and they'll be left standing on the platform. Buh-bye.

Obama/Biden 2012

Yes, Jody, the low-information crowd loves them some 'catch words' in order to fein outrage.

They go from one gotcha catch word to another with complete failure to imagine the substance of an entire event or speech.

o wow. the BS is getting deep around here. Fortunately, although MSNBC has been totally late to this party, everybody BUT the White House admitted it was a coordinated attack. BUt if you only listen to msnbc instead of looking around, you would not know that.

Of course, how anyone can defend that the President sat around for a week and campaigned (and pretended that this was over a video) but joke about the 15 minutes Bush sat in a kindergarden classroom after the first plane hit the WTC in 2001, you are a terrible hypocrit.

This is not about being levelheaded. In fact, the White House contended outright in the face of many pother reports that it was spontaneous. So yes, they look like idiots. But go ahead and elect him.

PS: Afghanistan was the right place. Interesting how people (even terrorists) can move around from country to country. never heard of that before.

Caesar, you've got to get a new hat, the tinfoil in your current one isn't working. Gee, a reasoned response after some deliberate thought. Surely no reasonable person has a problem with that. Just the right wing nut jobs and Romney evidently. His interference confused the issue. There are reasons why it is against the law for private citizens to be conducting foreign affairs. Romney is treading the line close here. You want him fundraising with foreign leaders in foreign countries? That's what he did.

They spent weeks apologizing for the person who made the video that had nothjing to do with the attack. It does not matter which side spun the lies or the inaccuracies. It was an obvious terrorist attack and they knew it. Just because it ia an election year, that does not mean that the Office is on vacation to just concentrate on campaigning. Personnaly, I would have more respect if they said the hell with campaigning and did thier job. If the job is getting done, it would guarantee re-election. Unfortunately, that has not happened and it is crunch time. Problem is, we have no choice. More of the same, which has amounted to nothing or the rich kid who will sell our country.

Nobody waited till they had all the facts. Who the hell are yall thinking your BSing? If he would have waited to get all the facts, he would have stated so. He COVERED it up withthis movie crap. He did not give different scenarios he factually stated it was the movie. Fact is he was still saying the movie when his press secratary said otherwise. So he was either wrong or lying. You can't come out now & say they wanted to get the facts. If the dumbass was smart, he would have said that he had no comment until it is investigated. But that didn't fit his agenda. You people would try to cover this failure to the end.

Deerhunter is absolutely correct. You Obamabots say he was waiting for the facts...NO. He jumped to a conclusion immediately blaming that stupid movie. Turns out he jumped to the wrong conclusion...ooops! Now, he has to try to cover up that bad judgement with BS of "waiting for all the facts!"

This is a lame argument ... let's discuss Pearl Harbor/

The fine argument is that if we knew what our enemies would do, we would not have any.

kaybee...

You misappropriated use of the word "leader" in your description of Mr. Obama. You can say what you want about the man, good or bad, but the term "leader" does not apply. It's like saying a turnip is a great swimmer.

For those stating that Mr. Obama was "waiting for the facts"...he was still bleating about the stupid YouTube video in his speech yesterday.

At this time in the last Century and before the media wouldn't be so eager to get that up to the minute scoop over others. Yes, they loved to scoop other media but there was also a recognition of time to figure things out. Press secretaries often give the media something, anything, a bone to chew on just to get rid of them until the facts can be gotten. That, alas, is a sign of the times in which we live.

The government of Libya is fully cooperating and has already arrested some of the culprits. They have stated that the problem looks worse than it is because the media hones in on the small groups of a small fraction of the total Libyan population instead of looking at the entire population including those with signs marching in favor of the US and condemning the actions of the terrorists.

Sure, it was no doubt planned as a radical Muslim "celebration" of the 2001 event and unfortunately our embassador and 3 others were killed in the raid.

Ambassador Stevens didn't like heavy security as it prevented him from being among the people which is what he loved to do. Likely it wasn't Libyans who conducted the raids but al qaeda members from the Middle East and not North Africa.

We live in a dangerous and unpredictable world, especially in the Middle East and North Africa. Anyone who goes there or lives there risks their lives every day. That said, the internal affairs of other countries are none of our business but when we butt in whether 20+ years ago or just a few years ago we pay the price. That price, unfortunately was paid, in part, by Ambassador Stevens and the others in Libya and by those in Egypt.

Restraint in labelling demonstrators as terrorists is necessary under our "innocent until proven guilty" philosophy. It has yet to be proven that all that took part in demonstration in Benghazi were part of the terrorist operation there. That some take issue with this reluctance to rush to judgment will not affect the ultimate outcome here.

When these terrorists are captured (and some have already been arrested), we will learn more about their operation. Then, we can accurately say whether everyone at the consulate that day was a terrorist or not.

That some here feel compelled to jump to conclusions based on what they now know, will not affect in the least, the investigation into this event. It will continue, new info will be learned, more terrorists will be captured and put on trial, and some terrorists may be killed.

And if some of those demonstrating that day are found to be guilty of only being angered by the film and were not involved in the terrorist attack, then many here would owe them an apology.

The administration jumped to conclusions when they marched Ambassador Rice out to state that it was factual that this was based on the uprisings from Egypt. The president recognized the Libyan defense team for taking Ambassador Stevens to the hospital. Yet, the fact is that his body was dragged through the streets of Benghazi.

If the White House was truly waiting on the facts, they could have said that an incident has occurred in Libya which resulted in the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans. As we confirm more details, we will pass the information on to the American people.

They purposely reported information that could not be confirmed. The reason for this is inexcusable and is not what the American people deserve. It leads to reduced credibility and increased speculation as to the alterior motive for reporting a falsehood as a fact.

Well...

You know...it's just Obama and his "evolving" stance on things...one day he's against gay marriage then he's for it, first it was just a spontaneous attack and now it's a premeditated attack... Just keep on rollin' Obama!

I for one do not want to see us in another war nor do I want to wee the situation escalate. I trust the President and Secretary of State.

So you want to trust the people who told you this attack was spontaneous and was caused by a 15 minute film. I suggest you go rent the film "Idiocracy"... terrible movie but is pretty spot on about the decline of our ability to reason and the gradual lowering of our intelligence levels.

Caesar, you've got to get a new hat, the tinfoil in your current one isn't working.

tinfoil? do you even have the slightest clue why you made that comment? do I think there is a conspiracy? NO. Do I think this admin on top of the previous one is incompetent. Yes. Tinfoil. please, stop with the programmed responses.

I sure am glad Rosevelt saw Pearl Harbor for what it was.

Oh no.....Mr. "Dodger-in-Chief" Obama assigned Mr. "Canary" to spill the TRUTH. Guess the SofS and our U.N. Ambassador Ricecake have egg all over their faces.

Good job, Mrs. Clinton....that will look so good on your "Modern Day" Progressive flier and your resume when you THINK about running in 2016. This is NOT going away like Whitewater and you throwing your Bollywood campaign contributor under the bus.

Sheeeesh, what else is this administration hiding from the American people ?

Maybe we could ask the "girls" on the View.

If the white house sees it so clearly then why did BO say close to 10 times at the UN the video was the main reason for the violence? He harped on it continously in his speech.

If they don't think it's the video, then why are they spending $70k of our hard earned tax dollars to run ads in Pakistan apologizing for the video?

-first day he said terror

-next week or so video

-then Carney and the gang said definitely terror

-BO yesterday at U.N says video once again

-today is back to terror again

What in the heck is going on in the white house with this?

The reality is that only the president and his national security team have access to all the information, and they are only getting it themselves as the investigation continues. Has it ever occurred to those who are so quick to point fingers that some information is not for public consumption?

Even one as high up in the opposition party as Mitt Romney, the GOP candidate for president, spoke hastily on the issue of the demonstrations and the attack in Benghazi that killed four Americans. We should not be surprised when the general public, especially people who have been whipped into a frenzy of judgment and delusion in this ABO atmosphere, do not act any better.

Terrorists will appreciate your attacks on President Obama. Their goal is to divide Americans and some of you are playing right into their hands.

Obama said these were NOT terrorist attacks but an unplanned spontaneous attack "because of that You Tube video". You mean, Obama was wrong???? How can that be? He's never wrong. What pieces of poop the news media is. On Tuesday, 9/11 BHO and his press secretary said: "These attacks were because of that you tube video." On Wed. our president and his press secretary said again: ""These attacks were because of that you tube video and not a terrorist attack." Realizing that this lie is impossible to sell to even a blind republic, the White House, after a week of being proven wrong, finally, grudgingly, tepidly tells the partial truth. The news media ignores these earlier misleading statements as if they never happened. The President lied to us for political reasons and tried to cover up what really happened. Cover up the fact that even though we were warned by Libya of a possible 9/11 attack on our consulate, as was written in Chris Stevens' journal, our leaders did nothing to protect them. If this had happened on Bush's watch, the media would be all over him. What a freakin joke the MSM is. Will we ever know the truth? Does the MSM even care about truth anymore? Does the American public even care?

Some may wonder why it took Obama 16 days to acknowledge this was a terrorist attack but it certainly makes sense - Obama had to wait for a poll to make the decision on whether this was caused by a video or was a terrorist action and it takes time to get the poll question data summarized.

Bin Ladin is dead. Remember, Obama (not our generals, the CIA, or the Navy Seals) killed him. Obama, "courageously" said "do it", as every other President would have done. Obama then claims that he made a critical hit upon AQ. Terrorism is now, supposedly on the run.

So what happened in Libya. Our embassy, protected by Libyans, not US Marines, as is customary, despite numerous signs and warnings of immanent terrorist attack. is not reinforced, our people are not moved, and AQ over runs the place killing our Ambassador and others. Where was Obama, the "Dragon Slayer" then.

Is it no wonder the the great "Dragon Slayer" told the American people that it was a surprise attack by an uncontrollable mob provoked by a California film maker.

It was not until after the news broke the truth came out. Obama's staff, unable to figure out what version of Obama's lies to put out, stumbled with inconsistencies trying the defend the "Dragon Slayer" image. (Obama couldn't even give his staff a position to take.)

Only now, does the "Dragon Slayer" impliedly admit that it was a terrorist attack. He hasn't yet said that explicitly, even though his staff has. No reasonable explanation has yet to be given for the lack of security, despite the warnings, or the failure to evacuate our people. The best I have heard from the Administration is that the "safe house" wasn't really a "safe house" because everyone knew where it was. So, "Dragon Slayer", Commander-in Chief, why didn't you do what every intelligence agency in the world does when a location has been outed: move it? You had warnings but you didn't.

The Libyan regime, is and was, supportive of the United States and certainly, even if there were some tensions between it and us, it did not want our embassy sacked and our Ambassador killed. With the warnings "Dragon Slayer" why didn't you get on the phone to the Libyan President and say "there is some bad sh$t in the air, how about sending some troops over to our embassy". That would have been a common courtesy bestowed by one government to another.

Supposedly, before hitting the links, our Commander-in-Chief, gets and reads a highly classified report as to what is going on in the world. Presumably threats upon the US and its interests appear on page one. Where was our great "Dragon Slayer"? I believe he has now forfeited that title and does not deserve to remain as Commander-in Chief.

LMarcT @1.48

"Dip@!$%#" does not exist in this thread. You are a troll arguing with some nonexistent ghost. Read mine @1,.47 and argue with that. I am real.

...there's obvious concern about the President's mental state...Does anybody have any facts regarding this?

yosolo, you have posted this ridiculous off-topic rubbish after every article on the vine. I have concern about your mental state.

Here's a fact for you:

Barack Obama and Joe Biden will be re-elected on November 6, 2012.

May I suggest you stock up on kleenex and your alcoholic beverage of choice now? There is going to be some real depression in the GOP ranks come November 6 and you don't want to get caught without supplies for your own little pity party.

Kay: If Obama gets reelected where will I get the money to buy Kleenex and booze, From working? I don't have a job. From the government, a freebie? Thanks!! If we liquidated all those with trillions and billions in the country today we would get only enough money to sustain this country's for 10 weeks.

Where do you expect the Kleenex and booze to come from? Legitimate question looking for a legitimate answer.

It was simply a stall, If Noble Leader had been forced to say right then that We had suffered a successful terrorist attack ,( on 9-11 no less),with Four Americans killed , an Ambassador raped and murdered on what is considered American soil,(an act of war), at a time when the entire Government should have been on its highest alert, and American interests were being attacked in over thirty countries ,(and it wasn't because of some stupid movie, less than three hundred people had even seen it at that time,it was just a weak, convenient, excuse to cover a misearably failed foreign policy)) it might not look so good for the First Comrade,People might start remembering that it was Chairman Obama who, without Congressional approval, attacked the Khadhaffi Government and caused the mess in the first place ,(And there is absolutely no evidence that a "massacre" was about to happen, except the word of...... Our beloved One), even though the Libyans had demonstrably been cooperating with us and were no threat, People might start to remember it was this administration that is responsible for the turmoil in North Africa, with the abandonment of the Egyptian and Libyan governments to radicals,now, posing a grave threat to Our closest ally in the Middle East , Israel, while The First Fundraiser jets off to Vegas before Our ambassador's body is even cold,and the Middle East burns, and that would never do,why , People might start to realize We have an inexperienced, incompetent,radical,at the head of Our Government, so it was deemed better just to let the story die down for awhile and then be buried by his loyal MSM,(Marxist-Socialist Media), lapdog Cohorts, just as they did with the rest of this administration's disastrous foreign policy, twenty five million people out of work, sixteen trillion dollars of debt,more than every other previous administration combined, $50,000 of debt for every man woman and child in the country and growing daily!,a collapsed economy, due to a forced socialized medicine system that is going to not only destroy the best health care system in the world,but cause a majority of businesses to go under and a large number of doctors to quit, yup ,What a guy!, What a Party!What a Propaganda Arm!Just imagine what they could do if given Four more Years!

The Libya attack was just a bump in the road, and nothing another apology tour can't solve. Of course we have yet to hear Obama say the word terrorist, and you never will. Obama has made it abundantly clear that he is going to toss Israel under the bus, and say nothing about the hatred and violence of Islam.

President Obama "Sorry Mr. Netanyahu, I would love to meet with you to talk about the nuclear worries of Iran but I have to catch a plane to be on The View. BTW, have you seen the video that caused the consulate attack?"

SS - we do NOT need another military action - anywhere!

Didn't Obama order 50 troops to deploy? Maybe a few battleships?

Seeking -- Do you just make this crap up??? Gotta link to dead certain facts that several terrorists are already in jail as a result?

Also, what is your definition of "military action?"

I feel better about this conclusion from the White House after a couple of weeks of thought and investigation than I do Romney's hot headed, impulsive, opportunistic slur on the names of those who perished. The difference is there for all to see. I'll take the cool headed, deliberative Commander in Chief every time!

military action will not defeat radical religious ideology unless you are willing to commit genocide to achieve victory.

what does win ideological wars is defeating their propaganda. In this context, we have to show the world that we are not the western devils determined to push our belief systems onto the middle east. Show them a better way of life where they can be productive and provide safety and prosperity for their families and the propaganda that currently has the young flocking to the banner of AQ will no longer be so persuasive.

This is where we failed in Afghanistan. by moving into Iraq before the afghan people were in control we didn't show them a better way of life, we just changed what form their dictators took. Our military power can not win an ideological war, only the power of our example can do this.

Ben - according to UPI 9/13/2012 - BENGHAZI, Libya - Four suspected militants have reportedly been arrested in Libya in connection with the death of U.S. Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens
and three other consulate employees

This has been in the news for many days. Surprised you missed it.

Obama/Biden 2012

Thanks for the link, but please answer the other question as to your definition of military action. Thanks.

The difference is there for all to see. I'll take the cool headed, deliberative Commander in Chief every time!

That sure would have come in handy 10 years ago when we were thinking about invading Iraq.

Amen, Al!

Wayne-1656909 I feel better about this conclusion from the White House after a couple of weeks of thought and investigation

Yes I remember - that's what you said about Bush's response to Katrina, isn't it?

As I recall, Congress nearly unanimously approved action against Iraq. Took weeks of briefings and meetings. Can't get much more deliberate than that. It is amazing the depths of hypocrisy the left goes to in defending Obama's lying and deceit.

On Saturday, a Pakistani government minister announced a $100,000 bounty for the killing of an American citizen. In response to that, though, Obama is completely silent. The longer he dithers, the worse it looks for US commitment to our individual liberties.

Cool-headed deliberation??? It's been five days now. What is he waiting for? Is he hoping that if he ignores it long enough, people will just forget? By ignoring it, Obama is saying to the world that "Oh, we don't really believe in free speech - that's just part of our silly Constitution. We are much more concerned about Muslim paranoia."

We desperately need a President, like Mitt Romney, who has a clear idea of what this country stands for, and is willing to express it. Romney would never have let this much time go by without responding to a death threat against any US citizen. Obama is a coward!

Romney would have made a simple and powerful statement at the UN, like "A founding principle of the United States is that our citizens have the right to express themselves, even if their message is offensive. When one of our citizens is threatened by an official of a foreign power, our country is threatened. We will not condone such a threat!" Obama would rather just ignore it.

Al in Visalia CA

That sure would have come in handy 10 years ago when we were thinking about invading Iraq.

Al, the problem with the Iraqi War is that IT WAS planned by the Bush Adminstration. Bush had that war planned before 9/11 even happened. He just needed a reason to give to Congress. And voila, planes flew into buildings.

Ben-636050

As I recall, Congress nearly unanimously approved action against Iraq.

yes, based on lies spoon fed to them by the Bush Adminitration

Before taking the country to war, this Administration owed it to the American people to give them a 100 percent accurate picture of the threat we faced. Unfortunately, our Committee has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence," Rockefeller said. "In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed."

http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775

Yea no more military actions (hey i wonder what happened to those soldiers deployed to Nigeria last year?)

Huh? So now Bush concocted 9/11 and spoon-fed the government his own intelligence from several WORLD agencies? And you guys think that birthers are crazy?

The fact. the fact is Iraq (while we are deflecting the matter like Mr. obama didnt take unauthorized military action in Syria) was a problem long before W. in fact, Clinton's intelligence spoke of suspected WMDs. Additionally, the American invasion did not create Al Queda in Iraq. It was there conducting attacks in late 2002 and early 2003.

But lets deflect the fact that this was about a video... o wait no it wasnt.

You got any evidence to back up that accusation, Bayllie? Nope, didn't think so. You're just another weak-ass lib with an opinion....you really should leave topics of national security and foreign affairs to the grownups!

frstrm33-3149989

Huh? So now Bush concocted 9/11 and spoon-fed the government his own intelligence from several WORLD agencies? And you guys think that birthers are crazy?

where did I calim Bush concoted 9/11? I said Bush used 9/11 as a reason to invade Iraq.

And I also say that Bush ignored 40 memos warning him about what alQaeda was planning. Wether he ignored them out of need or stupidity we may never find out.

his own intelligence from several WORLD agencies?

see, your problem is that you still believe in this so called proof that Iraq had WMD. It's been debunked. Read the Senate Intelligence Committee Final Phase II Reports on Prewar Iraq Intelligence; here is another excerpt:

It is my belief that the Bush Administration was fixated on Iraq, and used the 9/11 attacks by al Qa'ida as justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein. To accomplish this, top Administration officials made repeated statements that falsely linked Iraq and al Qa'ida as a single threat and insinuated that Iraq played a role in 9/11. Sadly, the Bush Administration led the nation into war under false pretenses.

http://intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775

jwilson1234

You got any evidence to back up that accusation, Bayllie? Nope, didn't think so

What claim? that Bush used 9/11 and WMD as an excuse?

During the past 3 weeks there have been several articles quoting CIA sources about the fact that Bush had been told MONTHS before 9/11 that we would be attacked. He chose not to alert anyone.

Condi Rice admitted it in interviews a couple of years ago. Said they had been told we would be attacked by our own aircraft but since they didn't know how they didn't want to "panic" the public.

Try to catch up guys!

Obama/Biden 2012

Frstrm

It has always been American policy to protect its citizens overseas. When military forces are sent into a country to protect American citizens, it is not considered to be a military action, but rather one of providing security for our people. It is a fine line, I admit, but the orders the soldiers receive in providing security is to only fire when fired upon. Contrast that with a military action where the orders include obtaining objectives through use of military force. There is a clear difference.

In answer to question of ships off coast of Libya. This is what is usually called a "show of force". We do this to show potential enemies what they will have to deal with if they continue terrorist activities. The hope is that it will discourage further terrorist activity. In addition, if there is another attack, we could then launch an appropriate military response. Until the order is given, it remains a show of force.

bayllie, SeekingSanity,

Facts? They don't want, nor can they understand facts... I appreciate the links to the Intelligence Committee reports. I saw last night that on surveys of current Republican voters, nearly 2/3 believe we actually found WMD in Iraq.

I had a friend posting on Facebook how Howard Stern had shown how "stupid" Democratic voters were by not knowing many commonly known/held facts. I haven't seen the survey, so I have no idea if they had results from surveys on Republican voters... but from everything I've seen/heard, they are living in some alternate universe. They don't believe history, they don't believe science, they don't believe/see how corrupting money is in our history/government/lives... they just have this misguided belief that they are somehow "moral" and smarter/more patriotic than anyone who thinks any differently from them.

Apparently they have never watched and episode of "Jay walking" on the Jay Leno show... or they would understand how "dumb" a very large percentage of the population is about nearly anything related to government or the Constitution... both sides...

Their views are dark, cynical and honestly it would seem to me that anyone who thinks that way would be personally miserable all the time. I would feel sorry for them, but unfortunately they are hell bent on dragging us all down with them... ironically "thinking" they are "saving" us all...

yes, based on lies spoon fed to them by the Bush Adminitration

so you have problem with 'Lies' during the Bush admin but not the Obama one? HOW INSANE

Tired-one

I will tell you what, show me actual proof that WMD were found.

I saw last night that on surveys of current Republican voters, nearly 2/3 believe we actually found WMD in Iraq.

some Republican voters also believe that a woman can prevent pregnancy if she is "legitimately" raped. Some Republians believe evolution is fake because monkies in zoos don't turn into humans.

So telling me what people believe in is not PROOF, never was proof, and never will be proof.

I had a friend posting on Facebook how Howard Stern had shown how "stupid" Democratic voters were by not knowing many commonly known/held facts

i find Howard Stern entertaining but he is not an expert on WMD or 9/11 or terrorists. Please come up with someone other than Stern.

Tired-One - sorry, clearly the CIA and Condi Rice lied when they said the Bush Administration had been warned of attacks prior to 9/11. What can I say? Who knew Condi and the CIA would lie about a thing like that?

Obama/Biden 2012

You mind telling exactly where in all that information that the US knew exactly the date, the time, the targets, and the manner of the attacks?

And to your point about WMD...here is a listing of some of your more "enlightened" Democrat viewpoints (you'll notice that some of the comments were made during the Clinton administration).

As posted from another poster a few days ago...

And here's the quotes from all those democrats, with the same intelligence the republicans had, that believed Sadaam had WMD:

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Bush is gone, has been a long time now.

We were attacked plain and simple. How long you going to ignore the fact?

Even Bill Clinton would have had some missles making sobering noises.

JK1963

You mind telling exactly where in all that information that the US knew exactly the date, the time, the targets, and the manner of the attacks?

never said that either. Boy you guys love to take couple of words from a quote, make up the rest and use it as proof.

thanks for all those quotes because all they prove is that these people believed there might be WMD because Bush Admin told them he had proof. That so called "evidence" turned out to be complete garbage. So what is your point?

BTW, did Clinton start a war with Iraq? hmmm, I don't remember one...

bay lie...

Only point anyone is making on this is that Bush did not act without the advice and consent of our countries leaders at the time. Even his opponents approved of the action.

Was the information garbage? Absolutely not. Remember Saddam Hussien said in a final interview something along the lines of having to put up a big front to keep Iran and others afraid of him and did not believe Bush would follow through.

Kind of like you think you are fixing to get mugged by a thug and you act like you are armed because it is your only defense.

Bay,

You are the one that keeps blaming Bush for the 9/11 attack. You keep pointing to intelligence data that gives warnings of imminent attack, but yet lacks any specifics. Given that, what was anyone to do? If the attack was going to come for the air, would you have wanted the national air grid to be shut down? And for how long? It's very easy to play Monday morning quarterback, but given the lack of SPECIFICS of when, where, and how an attack would be carried out against us, it's clear that you want to keep blaming that person in office. Say, answer this, if you are intent on blaming the person who happens to be in office at the time, how come Clinton let the World Trade center get bombed the first time? And why don't we blame Clinton (because he was in office at the time) for allowing the single largest domestic terrorist attack in US history, and finally, why don't you blame Clinton for the USS Cole attack by terrorrists?

As for those quotes, it's clear that you still didn't see that your fellow Democrats came to the same conclusion years before Bush was even in office...and in case you forgot, Iraq had already the ability to manufacture WMD and used them against the Kurds in the mid-'90s...

bayllie - they'll defend Bush for his inaction and still blame Obama no matter what. It has nothing to do with early knowledge - it has to do with the fact they hate Obama and look for ways to put him down.

The far right lacks the spine to just say they hate the man and would even if the economy was great and we were having 500,000 new jobs each month. It's an irrational hatred and we all know it!

Obama/Biden 2012

Seeking,

You are the one that refuses to place blame on those that should shoulder it. You are the ones that defended the philanderer-in-chief and say..."well...it wasn't his fault because he didn't know..." but in the very same breath you want to blame Bush. I was pointing out the left's hypocrisy with accepting blame. It's clear that the left will never accept responsibilities. It's ok...we've all used to the party of "It wasn't my fault!" Grow up for a change...

And last I checked, I didn't reference Obama in any of these posts... I don't hate the man...I think he's an awful president...but don't hate him. I dare say that you can say the same about yourself with other past presidents. Like I said...we are used to your daily hypocrisy.

Vote Romney/Ryan!

A change in the right direction!

There was NO specific info that the twin towers themselves would be hit. We had specific warning in Libya about a specific target (Benghazi Embassy) from the Libya govt themselves. 3 days prior. In a very unstable country with lots of unaccounted weapons. At a minimum we should have had a forward marine unit there on 9/11. In my opinion it shouldn't have even been open without one as we have a very secure place in Tripoli. Somebody seriously dropped the ball there resulting in four deaths. This was very preventable.

Agreed ATC,

It's clear that we had ALL the information we needed to protect our citizens abroad and yet took no action. While at the same time, we had NO specific information about the attacks on the twin towers, and yet people on here would rather blame Bush than blame Obama.

bayllie, SeekingSanity...

I was supporting YOUR positions... I guess I'm getting worse at writing! LOL...

There were no WMDs, of course... I was pointing out that a majority of Republican voters believe we actually found them there...

SS,

I'm not sure how to reply to your message on the CIA and Rice... The evidence from the intelligence report, the testimony of Rice to Congress... it all supports the fact that President G W Bush was advised an attack was imminent, that it was Osama bin Laden behind it and the operatives were in the U.S. already. I guess you were being sarcastic? Maybe thinking my response was sarcastic?

I've heard they were even advised that the intelligence suggested they would use aircraft to make the attack. To answer another response above, I don't know that they had an exact date... but honestly... how much detail do you have to provide a President? Even if he didn't want to cause "panic" (which seems highly unlikely to me), certainly they could have stepped up airline security and focused on the threat. It didn't support what they "wanted" to hear, i.e., that it was Saddam Hussein that was the threat...

I read once that there was even a "note" declaring they would attack major U.S. cities with aircraft and Bush dismissed it because the note was simply signed "Osama"... with the reported response from Bush of "It only had a first name... so how were we to know it was bin Laden?" From what we've seen of the intelligence report, this is not spelled out and may not be factual, but this is something I read years ago, not just since the Rice testimony and released intelligence reports.

Regardless, we were attacked during a Republican President's term... there was clear intelligence of a threat... and they did nothing... And all you "conservatives" think Republicans are so "strong" on foreign policy and that President Obama is "soft" on terrorist... It appears quite the opposite to me and I believe the facts clearly support that view.

Tired,

You and all the left are so eager to "blame" someone. So exactly what would you have done? Would you have shut down all the airports indefinitely? Totally banned air travel because some unknown threat, that didn't have a time and a place? Would you have stripped searched every passenger to make sure they weren't carrying a box cutter (I mean, because according to the left Bush was supposed to know all those little details, right)? I mean, grow up... You belittle someone like Bush for claiming we were attacked during a Republican's term...fine...you want to play that game...how let's talk about Clinton He was in office when the first bombing of the World Trade center occurred and yet he didn't stop it. Clinton was also in office when we experienced the most devastating attack by a domestic terrorist and yet he stood by and did nothing...and finally Clinton was also in office when the USS Cole was attacked and yet he still didn't do anything... So you happy? Clinton was in office during all these attacks so it's fair to blame him right since you are so righteous about blaming Bush. I'm sure if (God forbid) we have an attack in the US in the next few months before Obama gets defeated in the elections and you'll want to blame someone else besides him, right?

And regarding the WMD...as far back as 1998, Democrats were screaming up and down that Hussein had WMD's and wanted to stop him, so where is al the outrage at them? They were promoting the idea that he had WMD's well before Bush was even in office.

Just another terrorist attack on Obama's watch, that he has yet to admit.

Baylee: the pot calls the kettle black. My comment said "suspected." Not once did i say "actually had." So when you develop better reading comprehension, I'll pay attention to your posted articles.

Hindsight is 20/20. You should probably also know the more general accepted theory was that Saddam was posturing to keep his mortal enemy Iran at bay. This is more than likely the cause of all the tribulations post-desert storm. Again, these WORLD agencies had intelligence that "suspected" WMDs were being create. Similar to how Iran is acting these days.

So you get the quotes right.

Seeking sanity: its sad that because people disagree with our president we are branded as hateful people. Was this the case under Bush? Are you projecting your hate for Bush onto those that disgaree with president Obama's policies? Because independents disagree with him, does that make them right wing nutjobs? Or is it your opinion that ALL independents love him?

I have no issues with him personaly. He is charismatic and seemingly laid back. I have a problem with his policies. Short and simple. I dont agree with them.

yeah, go figure...

Calling an innocent demonstrator a terrorist is a line we did not cross until we knew it to be true.

Calling a terrorist a demonstrator is hardly a disservice to the terrorist as he will eventually be called a terrorist when it is proven.

Calling a demonstrator a demonstrator is what Rice did pending further information gathering.

I do not see the problem with this approach as it does not label anyone as worse than they really are.

This is the proper method of good diplomacy. Only say the worst after it is proven.

shaak...

The damage and four dead people prove all any of us need to have proven that this is an act of war not a demonstration.

Respond to acts of war with acts of war and quit playing games with these stone age fools

If George W. were still in office, we'd be invading Iran, as a result of the ambassador's death in Libya.

More likely we would have allowed Isreal to obtain and drop our super Secret Super deluxe bunker buster on the research facility.

This is just another terrorist attack on Obama's watch that he has yet to admit. Sort of surprising that the typical blame and excuses haven't worked for Obama this time. Blaming a film was pretty lame, even for Obama.

Unfotunately, the GOP sees everything too simply and wishes to continue with "one size fits all" attempts at solutions.

The world continues to be complicated, unpredictable and ever changing...

A Republican response to change is "flip-flopping". A Democrat response to change is "evolving".

Evolving into what? The economy stinks and is getting worse. They gave money to the banks and businesses that caused the entire economic crash. We are getting attacked overseas with no response except to apologize for being Americans. Nothing has evolved. What fantasy world have you been living in?

What fantasy world have you been living in?

-------------------------------------------------

There are two ideological fantasy worlds competing here...Yours is just one of them...

dangerfield

This just in...

The world continues to be complicated, unpredictable and ever changing...

The most comforting thing I have heard in quite awhile, else comedians would be on the breadline.

The housing market continues to recover. Consumer debt is down. Job growth remains slow, but will pick up with resurgence of consumer spending.

A big improvement from -8.5% growth in 4th quarter 2008 with its 800,000 jobs lost per month, a plunging stock market (now double its March 2009 low), a crashing housing market, an almost out-of-business auto industry.

I would say our economy is improving. It would be even better if we had increased infrastructure spending (Tea Party House blocked it) and passed a needed jobs bill. Stimulus speeds recovery. Austerity stops it in its tracks.

shaak - actually home prices are at their highest in 3 years. Things are looking up - not as quickly as we'd all hoped but still better than 4 years ago.

Obama/Biden 2012

4 years ago was the result of a Democratic controlled House and Senate, so any fault for that falls on them. They passed the laws that allowed the crash of the economy. I will admit, however, that the money we are flushing into all of these countries who hate us would have been better used to repair our infrastructure instead of trying to improve their countries. That started with the Bush administration, but could have been halted by the Obama camp. Not paying countries to be our friends is something that I think the majority of the population would agree with. It has gotten us nowhere so far.

gunner...

giving money to people that hate us started way before Bush was even born

The Libyan President forced his hand. He stated that the video had nothing to do with the attacks and yet Obama goes in front of the UN and all he talked about was the video. No wonder he couldn't get anyone to meet with him while he was there(except for Bibi who Obama snubbed). He has no credibility with other world leaders. They are getting tired of his lying too.

Rocco - bingo!!

Rocco-2976776 & sirie

To bad the Lemmings don't get it. They do, they just won't own up to it.

Yeah, they are sure in "deflect mode" right now!

Obama also said at the UN, "The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam."

That little gem of a quote managed to escape being reported on by a number of news agencies. Don't worry about free speech Mr. President, that policy was another administration's fault.

TCovington - it wasn't reported because it wasn't said.

Obama/Biden 2012

it wasnt reported....

The president told the UN that the “future must not belong” to a series of people including “corrupt” leaders and those who “bully women.” But one line from that list stood out. “The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.”

Well...it is campaign season for Obama so little things like national security get missed from time to time. It's too bad people had to pay with their lives...

Give him credit, oner! This time it only took him, oh, I guess it WAS 15 days to flip-flop I mean, evolve to a position that everybody else in the world understood right from the get-go, including the top officials in Libya. If I had been this stupid when I was still working, I would have been fired on my second day.

classic!

Please stick around and keep posting for the next four years. Seeing you whine and moan and roll around in your own feces will be a hoot!

pretty sure that will be the libs. Have fun!!

Wow, boozer, do you have chills and night sweats and wake up screaming the way I do? Every time I think about another 4 4 44, I have to run for the bathroom. It's an even tossup on whether I will need to hurl or squat.

No Jody, we all knew it was an act of terrorism... c'mon, rocket propelled grenades at a "rally"

sad but true Jody. He's constantly in a no win situation with that group. i'm just glad that they are a minority of the people in this country...

9/11!

Jody - the ignorance of the right is predictable - sad but predictable. The idea that something should actually be investigated first is foreign to them - as so much of everything is!

Obama/Biden 2012

Jody, Iowa

It probably would have helped a great deal if the Obama administration had not rushed to apologize to those folks that killed the ambassador that aren't terrorists.

The only thing the GOP has investigated that I can remember in the last couple of decades was Bill Clinton and Monica. Why bother to investigate when you can make stuff up? That is today's GOP.

So its okay to jump to conclusions that it was a video, but now it okay to stopp adamently defending that position when after two weeks (and no reports by MSNBC) the world has told the White House its a terrorist attack?

Do you still believe the GOP is the reason we are paying $4 a gallon for gas?

SS,

If they where waiting for the investigation to be completed, why did they walk out the story that it was spontaneous and not premeditated attack?

Who where they protecting? If you say Americans in the region, I would agree. But if that's the case, why go to Las Vegas? If he thought for one minute more Americans could be harmed, why go?

The visuals didn't match the situation.

Rick - againg with the lies about President Obama apologizing. You're beyond belief - but clearly a good little Republican. Lie, repeat, lie again!

Obama/Biden 2012

No - instead he hurried up the statement that it wasn't a terrorist attack and that it was because of an inane video. And then he continued that rhetoric for 10 days in the face of mounting evidence to the contrary. Why? Because he doesn't want the story to be "Why was nothing done to increase security for US citizens abroad on the anniversary of the largest terrorist attack in US history?" Where is that story?

Seeking,

Perhaps we should all be little "yes" Obamaites, right?

Jody,

So why would Obama care what the right says now? Calling the attack for what it was and not hide behind some flimsy excuse of a bad movie makes just sound like fools.

I saw some original reporting that said the assasination imperiled an intelligence gathering operation in Benghazi, in other words, the administration needs to keep a lid on this to protect our sources - maybe we should keep our traps shut!

See...there are these nasty little things called "facts". I understand that they are a cumbersome burden to my friends on the right but out here in the real world away from the bubble of ignorance in which you like to shelter yourselves it is customary to take some time to actually ascertain what the facts are.

That way you don't end up involved is some crazy s*** like invading Iraq based on some bad intel that says they have WMDs and then having to come up wth new reasons when he facts don't pan out.

Amy, That reporting was pretty poor. The CIA agents were ordered to evacuate and that is what imperiled our inteligence gathering. We now have no boots on the ground. What, does Maine still get their news by telegraph?

Da Noid

You never let them get in your way.

forward? forward where?..of the effin' cliff!!!!......obama will never have the support of people who love our nation and are concerned about where we are heading as a people.......win or lose, obama will never be accepted by a large portion of our populace...

To bad for you people. President Obama is going to win and you will have to deal with it. For the rest of America, we are moving Forward, with or without you.

MPW, Nutjob1's forward is code for Owebama meaning bend over so you can take it the rear and have Bidet clean up afterwards.

So if Obama wins re-election who is he going to blame for the mess he is in?

Job1 -- to bad for you people

you mean Americans?

AG-42633.6.5

Like I said, "For the rest of America, we are moving Forward, with or without you."

So you're ok with the 3 trillion in debt? Even though the W. Era but the US less than a third of that in debt? I mean... simple logic apparently doesnt apply.

But what does apply here is that the Admin was more interested in blowing off the issue during election time by pushing the video excuse at it instead of taking into account the multiple sources saying otherwise. If you;d read more than one news outlet, you'd know that since NBC decided to not report on anything for the past two weeks.

Job1,

Good luck with that one.

Yep, no division here.

HEY! We want to talk about Romney's comment about rolling down an aircraft window, not something bad about the president!!

play fair!!

sheesh.....

In case you have not noticed numbskull Job1, the posters on this a liberal forum are overwhelmingly against four more years of Obama's failure.

That is not a poll, that is reality.

What a ridiculous statement mike-637267... I guess you're just counting the days until Mitt sweeps into office and puts all those pesky people on the planet who don't worship American power and money everyday in their place...

Honestly, there must be some conservatives who have some clue about diplomacy, strategy and dealing with others... but they are well hidden by people who make such shallow, nonsensical comments.

Word "concerned"! To have the unmitigated gall to LIE, I mean bold-face lie to the American public is unbelievable! Well, considering the mo of this administration, it's totaly believable. But then again, if you're not willing to "call a spade a spade", then you get what you deserve (and no you liberal tools, it's not a racist statement, but I'm absolutely sure that most, if not all of you will see it as such...). The almighty bho has downplayed every terroristic attack we have faced since he took office, and then REFUSES to use the word terrorist. Hell, even the Libyan President call it how he sees it, "But it is for President Obama, Secretary Clinton to describe the way they like and they feel right. I mean, you have your terminology. And we have our terminology. It's an act of terror." And there you have it. And for the record you ignorant libs, your hero clinton sent several cruise missles (anyone know the cost of each?) to bomb empty tents after the attack on the Khobar Towers, after vowing to "bring these terrorists to justice!" Good to see that your liberal bastions of power follow up on their weak threats. I guess that pretty much sums up the entire base of the Democratic Party, weak.

i wish he would be impeached.....obama is a poison pill...

To be impeached, one would have to commit a crime, or an act of treason. Of course being a Black Man is no crime.

Nutjob1, Didn't you get the memo from Madonna? He is a black Muslim man.

Boy, these GOP Cults Members have lost it.

Just him opening his mouth to spew more natural methane is a crime as per his own EPA regulations!

Actually, President Obama has taken out more radical terrorist than W. Bush.

Do you Remember in 1983 when Suicide bomber killed 241 American troops in Beirut, Lebanon? Three months later, President Ronald Reagan pulled the Americans out of Beirut, and nothing was done about that attack.

Job1 - Of course, Bush captured hundreds of al-Qaeda alive and sent them to Guantanamo for interrogation. The liberals said that was very, very bad. Obama shoots them or blows them to little bloody bits. The liberals say that is very, very good. If that were true, then it is very simple, quick and easy to correct Bush's “mistake”. Just kill all the prisoners at Gitmo tomorrow and close the place down.

Mcwacky, Its people like you who are cause of many of the ills in the world. You jump to conclusions and act rashly upon them. There's time to investigate. But the arrogance of knowing you're right blinds you to the possibility you're wrong. Could be religious?, but in any caes its dangerous. Romney falls in this category as well. In addition however, you also believe what you've told and that makes you a tool, unable to think for yourself. Pathetic, really, and kind of sad.

They used peanut butter bombs?

I love it! Mental picture: this little terrier with humongous, jug-handled ears trying to clear the peanut butter off the roof of its mouth! Too good, too vivid!

Sebuttpan - Bush knew for several months that we were going to be hit by terrorits and did not warn anyone. Yet you idiots voted for him - twice.

I don't know how clear the warning was to President Obama but I am certain he didn't ignore it. It's so much easier to be the armchair QB like you and think you know it all.

Obama/Biden 2012

deflect much?

No doubt "sirie"! And since "seekingsomethingbutprobablydoenstknowwhat" seems to enjoy the facts, then prove where G.W. Bush knew of the impending attacks on 9/11. Prove it "seeking"! And while your at it, prove that the almight bho didn't have actionable intellengence in the days/weeks prior to this latest idiocy. Of course they are going to say that they didn't! Sure don't want to make the almighty bho angry, or look like the tool he actually is! Carney and Rice are freaking jokes! I exclude Hillary as that I actually have a small bit of respect for her, very small, and is shrinking by the day.

SS - How can you be so blind, is there anything that your mind might think could be blamed on your Idol Obama.

As female that we are do you see anything that is not perfect about this man.

I can certaily find goo things about him as a person and a husband, however as President he stinks. He flips and then he evolves.

Sirie - Talking to InsaneSanitation is like talking to the wind. She is what I would call a Populist Radical Popcorn. Same as extreme liberal.

NPCDan - where were you the last 3 weeks? It has been all over the news. The CIA reported telling Bush and Condi Rice for months about impending terrorits attacks against the US in 2001. The Bush administration said it wasn't disclosed because they didn't want to creat panic.

The fact that you don't keep up with news is no one's problem but yours!

Obama/Biden 2012

the definition of insanity is doing the same thing repeatedly, in hope the outcome will be different. so reeking insanity keeps "tool"ing and re"tool"ing her obamanation claptrap, hoping she will sound intelligent...FAILED!

"seekingliberalapproval", I'm sorry, I thought it was 2012, and not 2001. Nice deflection though! And from the news I've been watching, ABC, NBC, CBS, FOX, all seem to imply that the almighty bho is a complete idiot man-child who refused to take responsibility for ANYTHING that has happened during his failed tenure as president. And if you want to drag up history, how did your boy slick willy clinton fair against the very same terrorists? Yep, that's what I thought. I for one am extremely glad that stupidity isn't contageous, as that I happen to live right next to a blue state. Idiots.

President Obama was a student in 1983, when the President cut and ran when a Suicide bomber killed 241 American troops in Beirut, Lebanon, and nothing was done about that attack.

You and your Fuxed up friends are probably the only people to believe that Kirsten Powers is a Democratic strategist. She might call herself that, but she is definitely not. I think Fuxed up News gave her that title so that they could attempt to be not so right-wingey. Bunch of posers.

4 more4 44!

Job and Alaska - the radical righties are out in force today. Clearly they're desperate - realizing their ship is quickly sinking and all the life rafts have holes!

Obama/Biden 2012

Totally what I was thinking as I read their ridiculous rantings! It's like a bunch of rabid dogs fighting over a scrap of meat. It won't do any one dog any good, but here they are foaming at the mouth.

"Don't roof rack me, bro!"........American dogs who demand to ride inside

4 more4 44!

O&Joe 2012

Another possibility is dumb as a door knob. Or sharp as a box of rocks. Any others anyone? Fortunately, I finally put SS, the princess of deflection and Obamaloney, on ignore so that I don't have to put with her garbage and general stupidity and ignorance anymore.

Actually, the disgrace was W. Bush. However, you people have the pleasure of 4 more for 44, and there is not a darn thing you can do about it.

Bush was a far better President than this Obama.

Sure he was. You keep believing that.

As this President horrible failures get by the liberal controlled media, more and more people are seeing the facts.

Bush signed TARP into Law cleaning up Bill Clintons mess of de-regulating the banks and the criminal neglect of Barney Franks criminal neglect.

Bush also signed the first bail-out check for GM of $13 Billion placed in a working escrow.

Obama was delt no bad hand at at all. All he does is moans and blames Bush.

ENOUGH.

Former president Bush was implicit in the murders of 2,983 of your fellow Americans on Sept. 11, 2001. That alone makes him the worst president in U. S history.

And as long as "The Anointed One" lies it's OK....

Alaska - this group of radical righties will never admit the truth. It's beyond their intellect and definitely beyond their integrity!

Obama/Biden 2012

Apparently it was okay that Georgie boy lied to all of you, as you all voted him in a second term. I am not going to try and theorize why president Obama chooses not to say the word terrorism, but he does understand that it is an act of terrorism, of that I have no doubt. I am one that will wait and watch and listen as the investigation further unfolds. None of us here on this thread knows what goes on behind closed doors. Those regions are a hot bed of anxiety for ANY administration to try and deal with. It may well have been a terrorist attack that killed the Ambassador and three others, but I am sure that all the other attacks on our embassies were a chain reaction result of Libya. But, again, none of us knows everything, and I don't think we should, at the cost of our national security. I do know for certain that president Obama will not let this go unpunished. One way or another there will be a retaliation for those killings.

Socialism, this will be our last communication, as your blog name is ridiculous and it speaks to your ignorance, and your comment "The anointed one" leads me to believe that you are of the ignorance on the right that questions president Obama's U.S. citizenship as well as if he is or isn't a Muslim. So, thanks for sparring, but at the end of posting this comment you will be put on ignore. Good luck in November, you are going to need it.

Obama/Biden 2012!

4 more4 44

AlaskaGirl-759554

And I bet you believe LBJ was the man on the "grassy knoll".

That's what was said in 1983, when 241 American troops were killed in Beirut, Lebanon.

No Job1, That was said in the 2008 election by Hillay Clinton against Obama.

Google it. Never mind I will do it for you.

The famous Clinton vs Obama 3:00 AM Call Ad - YouTube

Nutjob1, So why did Owebama make the same mistake? Seems he should have known better if he studied the libby blame book as much as you have.

job this is 2012 not 1983,its history like clinton and black hawk down. stop crying over spilt milk

That won't happen until 01-20-2017.

job1--Nov. 6 is going to be a really bad day for you.

"job1" or aka, axlerod. Don't you have some kow-towing to do? I'm fairly certain the almighty bho needs his ego stroked after being called out by nearly everyone in America! And even Libya! What an arrogant buffoon.

Debbie, did you stumble upon the wrong blog?

taxes?

Debbie, you're on the wrong thread. typical libby lost in libbyland

Home of the Populist Radical Popcorns . Translation, extreme Liberal Posters.

This news will have to be reported now by NBC. The Web is inundated with it.

So can President Obama count on your Support and Vote?

Hell not only Bush, they are going all the way back to Reagan to try & deflect the point that the Kenyan can't find his ass with both hands. It is going to be so sweet to hand them their arrogant ass's in November. This will NOT just go away. This will hang over his pointy little head until election time.

Hear! Hear! Very well said Mr. "Publius"! And of course "job1" axlerod has to counter with his typical snarky reply. Good job you silly libs! You're making America look weaker by the minute! "Ohh, let's wring our hands and wag the dog for a while and let this blow over! And if that doesn't work, we'll blame everyone but ourselves!!!" What a bunch of clowns.

One of my favorite points by : Mike Lofgren

Goodbye to All That: Reflections of a GOP Operative Who Left the Cult

"It should have been evident to clear-eyed observers that the Republican Party is becoming less and less like a traditional political party in a representative democracy and becoming more like an apocalyptic cult, or one of the intensely ideological authoritarian parties of 20th century Europe. This trend has several implications, none of them pleasant."

[Raping, killing, and dragging our ambassador threw streets...]

You know Pubis...you are a disgusting piece of crap to be spreading this falsehood...there is simply NO PROOF that Ambassador Stevens was raped, and yet you continue to spew this tripe which says a lot about you and your lunatic email cut and pastes...

I hope you're not breeding...eventually Darwin's Theory will weed out morons like you.

That's the GOP Cult for you.

axlerod, err, "job1", you should have put the whole title of the book in there, The Party Is Over: How Republicans Went Crazy, Democrats Became Useless, and the Middle Class Got Shafted. The only part of the title that befuddles me is the "democrats became usless" portion. I've always thought they were always useless...