• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Huckabee: Benghazi will drive Obama from office

Your opinion

  • Total voters
    79
MMC said:
That's Inaccurate.....Obama spoke first when they received Stevens and the Fallens bodies back at Andrews Air Force base. Sept 14th. Rice already had made the Sunday Shows.....evidenced.



When did Romneys remarks Politicize it.....Since they did not have their Debate until after Obama's Remarks in the Rose Garden and after Andrews Air Force base?
Click to expand...



Amid criticism, Romney doubles down on criticism of White House's response to Egypt, Libya attacks - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

September 12, 2012, 10:48 AM

(CBS News) In a press conference Wednesday addressing the recent violence in Egypt and Libya, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney doubled down on his criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the attacks, calling its response a "terrible course" that signaled the administration is standing "in apology for our values."

The Romney campaign put out a statement late last night -- on September 11 -- criticizing the president in connection with the violence. After he released the statement, it became known that four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, were killed after an angry mob at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in response to the production of an amateur anti-Islam film.

Speaking at a brief media availability Wednesday morning, the candidate defended his criticism, particularly targeting the White House over a statement from the Egyptian embassy that condemned "the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."

"I also believe the administration was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt, instead of condemning their actions. It's never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values." ...
 
pbrauer said:
Amid criticism, Romney doubles down on criticism of White House's response to Egypt, Libya attacks - Political Hotsheet - CBS News

September 12, 2012, 10:48 AM

(CBS News) In a press conference Wednesday addressing the recent violence in Egypt and Libya, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney doubled down on his criticism of the Obama administration's handling of the attacks, calling its response a "terrible course" that signaled the administration is standing "in apology for our values."

The Romney campaign put out a statement late last night -- on September 11 -- criticizing the president in connection with the violence. After he released the statement, it became known that four Americans, including U.S. Ambassador to Libya J. Christopher Stevens, were killed after an angry mob at the U.S. consulate in Benghazi in response to the production of an amateur anti-Islam film.

Speaking at a brief media availability Wednesday morning, the candidate defended his criticism, particularly targeting the White House over a statement from the Egyptian embassy that condemned "the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims -- as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions."

"I also believe the administration was wrong to stand by a statement sympathizing with those who had breached our embassy in Egypt, instead of condemning their actions. It's never too early for the United States government to condemn attacks on Americans and to defend our values." ...
Click to expand...

Right.....so how is that a politicization, again? How was Romney using it to politicize for a party? Or for himself. Criticizing what he believed was a mistake.
 
Just spoke to a friend of mine, a conservative talk radio producer. The guy is acting like a kid in a candy store giggling like a school girl over the Al Qaeda murder of an American ambassador. Un-freaking-belivable. I ask him if he was happy about it and he said yes to the point of laughter. To him the killing of an American serving his country doesn't seem to be the important thing. What is important this represents an opportunity to bring down his own duly elected President, who apparently is viewed as the enemy of the United States by the right. Bizarre.
 
MMC said:
Right.....so how is that a politicization, again? How was Romney using it to politicize for a party? Or for himself. Criticizing what he believed was a mistake.
Click to expand...
Are you kidding? He put this crap on his campaign webpage the night of sept 11 long before anyone knew anyone was killed. Where is the outrage for the attacks? He would rather point fingers at his opponent.
 
MMC said:
Right.....so how is that a politicization, again? How was Romney using it to politicize for a party? Or for himself. Criticizing what he believed was a mistake.
Click to expand...

:lamo :lamo :lamo

<sarcasm>Yeah, it's not like he had anything to gain politically by making the president look bad.</sarcasm> :roll:
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
:lamo :lamo :lamo

<sarcasm>Yeah, it's not like he had anything to gain politically by making the president look bad.</sarcasm> :roll:
Click to expand...
Romney said at least one thing that is true in his campaign. He said he wasn't a politician, if he was a politician he wouldn't have criticized the president, he would have expressed his outrage over loss of the 4 Americans and the attack first. Very bad timing on his part.
 
pbrauer said:
Are you kidding? He put this crap on his campaign webpage the night of sept 11 long before anyone knew anyone was killed. Where is the outrage for the attacks? He would rather point fingers at his opponent.
Click to expand...

Actually, it was after he has informed of the Killings and Overseas News had already released the info....were you hoping the US News media would be the defense?
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
:lamo :lamo :lamo

<sarcasm>Yeah, it's not like he had anything to gain politically by making the president look bad.</sarcasm> :roll:
Click to expand...

Well if you consider what Obama was doing with kids over Gun Control the same thing. Then I guess you can say it was politicization. But the point was Romney didn't continue to play on it. As the Democrats played it out.

I guess if he would have Been a General and then Said it.....it would have had more weight, huh? Then at least saying Obama made a mistake. He would have been accurate and correct.

But really do you think the deflection of Romney takes away any of Team Obama's bungling of Benghazi? So when the ARB stated managerial failures. Who's Incompetence within Team Obama's Crew did you think they were talking about.

Were they politicizing it? They said mistakes were made. Major Ones.
 
It's pretty clear that Obama did not do anything impeachable here.

I seriously doubt it will do anything to Hillary. She already testified, it's unlikely new material zinging her will show up. And anyone who cares deeply about Benghazi wasn't likely to vote for a Democrat -- any Democrat -- in the first place.

However, I don't think the Republicans are "nuts," they're just using it as a political cudgel. In particular, switching their ire from blaming Obama (before the election) to Clinton (after the election) is a bit... obvious.
 
Visbek said:
It's pretty clear that Obama did not do anything impeachable here.

I seriously doubt it will do anything to Hillary. She already testified, it's unlikely new material zinging her will show up. And anyone who cares deeply about Benghazi wasn't likely to vote for a Democrat -- any Democrat -- in the first place.

However, I don't think the Republicans are "nuts," they're just using it as a political cudgel. In particular, switching their ire from blaming Obama (before the election) to Clinton (after the election) is a bit... obvious.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately that didn't happen.....as they started out with an Email from Hillary to the President of Libya on the 12th of Sept telling him they Knew Ansar al Shariah was involved in the attack. A week before Rice went on the Sunday talk Shows. Immediately Cumming called for copies of all documentss. Since they didn't have them either.
 
MMC said:
Unfortunately that didn't happen.....as they started out with an Email from Hillary to the President of Libya on the 12th of Sept telling him they Knew Ansar al Shariah was involved in the attack. A week before Rice went on the Sunday talk Shows. Immediately Cumming called for copies of all documentss. Since they didn't have them either.
Click to expand...
So ?
 
Smeagol said:
I agree.

BTW I voted for him in the 2008 primary.

I use to think some people on the left were... shall we say a little unstable. What the election of President Obama has taught me is its not just some on the left but generally when we see people who are highly emotionally invested in politics, when they don't win that say and do things that will raise eyebrows. They have their 9/11 Truthers, we have our Obama Birthers. Basically if you want to look like a nut, marry your politics with emotionalism (better stated let OTHERS you esteem highly manipulate you into marrying your politics with emotionalism) then watch your side loose the election. Sometimes you feel like a nut - YouTube
Click to expand...

In my experience 9/11 Truthers are generally neither the right nor left, just loons. It surprises some partisans to learn that some folks don't distinguish between Republican and Democrat and consider them all to be part one giant conspiracy.
 
I've been listening to the Congressional hearings all morning and nothing so far will drive obama from office but it does make his administration look like the gang that couldn't shoot straight and the gang that tried desperately to cover their ineptness up.
 
MMC said:
Actually, it was after he has informed of the Killings and Overseas News had already released the info....were you hoping the US News media would be the defense?
Click to expand...
Huh ?
 
MMC said:
Benghazi is 6 hrs ahead of us.....who do you think had the story up before US Media found out.
Click to expand...

Romney:

But GOP presidential nominee Mitt Romney will likely face questions of his own today, not only about his foreign policy views (Romney had at least five different positions on Libya as of last October) but about his statesmanship.

Before news spread that four Americans had been killed in Benghazi, Romney yesterday issued a statement saying in part: “It’s disgraceful that the Obama administration’s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.”

This is an attack that does not stand up to simple chronology.

Asked what Romney was referring to, his campaign Tuesday pointed to a statement from the US Embassy in Cairo issued a statement “condemn(ing) the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims” — referring to the anti-Muslim movie allegedly inflaming the demonstrators, rioters, and attackers — but that statement was issued before the attacks on the diplomatic missions.
Click to expand...

The Politics (Ugh, Yes, the Politics) of the Attacks on the US Diplomatic Posts in Benghazi and Cairo* - ABC News
 
MMC said:
Unfortunately that didn't happen....
Click to expand...
I assume you're referring to the hacked emails.

Assuming they are real: Those were sent a journalist (who used to work for Bill C) -- as in someone outside the administration -- to Hillary. That hardly qualifies as an Administration consensus on the nature of the attacks by September 12th.

I realize this is hard to grasp, but it takes more than 30 seconds to figure out why an isolated diplomatic mission, in a volatile nation, got attacked.

Nor are the consequences of the kerfuffle particularly dire. As a result of the attack, the US hasn't declared war on Libya. The nation's security was not compromised. It is not realistic to turn every consulate and diplomatic mission into a miniature fortress. The deaths of the diplomatic staff could not be reversed based on the Administration's subsequent public statements.

So, forgive me if I toss a little salt over my shoulder when I see all the haters in a high moral dudgeon over this.
 
Visbek said:
I assume you're referring to the hacked emails.

Assuming they are real: Those were sent a journalist (who used to work for Bill C) -- as in someone outside the administration -- to Hillary. That hardly qualifies as an Administration consensus on the nature of the attacks by September 12th.

I realize this is hard to grasp, but it takes more than 30 seconds to figure out why an isolated diplomatic mission, in a volatile nation, got attacked.

Nor are the consequences of the kerfuffle particularly dire. As a result of the attack, the US hasn't declared war on Libya. The nation's security was not compromised. It is not realistic to turn every consulate and diplomatic mission into a miniature fortress. The deaths of the diplomatic staff could not be reversed based on the Administration's subsequent public statements.

So, forgive me if I toss a little salt over my shoulder when I see all the haters in a high moral dudgeon over this.
Click to expand...
They didn't care this much following 9/11 when close to 3,000 were killed. Just look at how long it took back then to get the Republican-led Congress to start up an inquiry over that.
 
Sheik Yerbuti said:
They didn't care this much following 9/11 when close to 3,000 were killed. Just look at how long it took back then to get the Republican-led Congress to start up an inquiry over that.
Click to expand...

What a silly comparison. The original 9/11 was a Pearl Harbor scale national emergency; the recent 9/11 was an episode of poor command decisions. Karl Marx was right: events occur first as tragedy and are repeated as farce.:cool:
 
Jack Hays said:
Sheik Yerbuti said:
They didn't care this much following 9/11 when close to 3,000 were killed. Just look at how long it took back then to get the Republican-led Congress to start up an inquiry over that.
Click to expand...
What a silly comparison. The original 9/11 was a Pearl Harbor scale national emergency; the recent 9/11 was an episode of poor command decisions. Karl Marx was right: events occur first as tragedy and are repeated as farce.:cool:
Click to expand...
It's not silly at all, the facts are that President Bush didn't want an investigation. And if it weren't for the "Jersey Girls" there might never have been one. BTW, didn't President Bush and his Dick get interviewed in secret. We also learned about the famous August 6th PDB. Bin Laden determined to strike in US

The investigate we have today is a partisan one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom