Obama 2012?

Boy, 'cover-up' sure has a low bar with you guys these days. I even saw Finn relate this to Watergate!

Cycloptichorn

No, he was comparing the journalists of that time to journalists of today. Stop reading into things. That whole thread became a train wreck due to that.

This looks promising!


source

I'm not prepared to accept this at face value until H2oman gives us his appraisal.

Or Finn.

That's Stop reading things into [something], McG.

I don't think there was a cover-up at all. The confusion that we saw immediately after the attack occured may have been understandable (though given the real time reports from our embassy staff and the fact that it occurred onn the anniversary of 9/11 make even that a bit hard to swallow). From about two days after the event through about six days later, there appears to have been a consistent and deliberate attempt from the White House and the State Department to falsely portray the event as a spontaneous reaction to the video clip no one has ever seen. Indeed the Feds wasted no time at all in finding and arresting the alleged creator of the video clip. That seemed very strange in view of facts that were already publicly available, and facts that have since emerged have confirmed that the event was indeed an attack by an al Quaeda affiliate.

If there was a cover-up in this fiasco it was so ineptly done as to have been meaningless. It appears far more likely that the administration was so wrought up in its counter attack on Mitt Romney's initial, very reasonable, and now confirmed judgment , that it just drifted into the lies required to continue their attack. More than anything I suspect this is simply a case of the Administration finally becoming the chief consumer of its own propaganda.

They had to believe that Obama's apology tour was not a feckless error, and that their extraordinary efforts to decouple anything involving Islam from the systematic dysfunctionality that infects most of the Arab/Islamic world is still an appropriate position . Thus the phrase "Islamic terrorism" is banned, even though it is a real, and identifiable and purely Islamic thing. They had to believe that it was we who excited the fury of a mob that killed our people in Bemngazi, and not something more organized and sinister, originating in their world, not ours.

The whole thing is a bit hard to understand, because the repeated judgments and statements of the key administration figures so defied common sense and (as we now know) compelling, in hand evidence as to be very hard to understand under any realistic theory.

I do, however, see a pattern here in the very strange defensive/hypocritical behavior of the Obama campaign. Gov. Romney is a "serial liar" because his state political positions have both evolved and been given different flavors in different venues - rather ordiunary stuff. Compare this to the stark and highly significant contradictions between Obama's campaign promises and what he has actually done in office. There appears to be a pattern of projecting their own failures and defects on the opposition, and that was also very evident in the fiasco following the tragic attacks and murders in Bengazi.

Personally, I suspect there was a whole bunch of stuff going on behind the scenes, and the stuff released to the media was deliberately misleading in order to further the goals of the investigation.

It's hard to believe that anyone is still using the phrase "Obama's apology tour" when nobody has identified any actual apologies.

That particular bullshit talking point has been debunked so many times, it makes it impossible to take anything else you've said seriously. You appear incapable of sorting fact from fiction.

An Open Letter to Ann Coulter
John Franklin Stephens

The R word? Really? It's come to that now? How retarded is that.

I suppose the letter had no meaning at all to you. Perhaps you do not have any retarded or handicapped persons in your life. I do, and I know that they are hurt when they hear the word used as a slur which was the point of the letter.

Revelette has dealt with this claim effectively. I won't repeat what she said. But in addition, I would like to point out a double standard here. You're giving Obama a hard time because of alleged confusion that lasted for days. George Bush was either confused or deliberately deceptive about the weapons-of-mass-destruction thing for years, and he started a war rather than admit he was wrong. Nevertheless, you approved of his re-election. You even approved of the way he bullied all allies of America's who had made the right call and stayed out. (I vividly remember sitting in your car and hearing you say, "I strongly approve of inflicting pain on France right now." That was in early 2007.) Perhaps a little perspective is in order here.

I fully understand the point of the letter, but words only matter in the context they are used. No one called the author retarded or implied that Obama was the same as a person with Down's Syndrome.

It's like Damn vs Darn. They mean the same thing, but one is more polite? What difference does it make if the context is the same and the meaning is the same? Words only offend those that want to be offended.

Coulter makes her money by being offensive. Bringing this up only makes her statement reach a bigger audience.

It's amazing the crap you will spew spurt.


http://firstread.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/02/14181546-romney-did-obama-raise-taxes?lite

Well, suffice it to say that I agree with very little that you've written here. While the event was tragic, it is quite clear that the hullabaloo around it is a case of Republican opportunism. I don't blame them - the election is close and either side would jump on something that they believe would give their guy an advantage. However, that doesn't make it accurate in the slightest.

In particular, however, a few points:



There was no 'apology tour.' This is a complete lie.



Romney had no reasonable nor confirmed judgement. He merely did exactly what he told his wealthy donors he would do, when caught on tape earlier this year: act swiftly to exploit whatever foreign policy advantage he could.



Ah, yes. 'Evolved' to be the complete opposite of what they were a few years ago, and many times, a few months ago; 'evolving' within a debate, to the point where his own campaign has to issue corrections after the debate contradicting what the candidate just said.

Different 'flavors.' I've never had ice cream that tasted like chocolate one day and vanilla the next, and strawberry three months later, and then coffee flavored one night when that seems popular.



Yes, that will happen, when after a year of campaigning the economy crashes - hard - because of the lack of a regulatory scheme put in by the guys who were there before you, and their incompetence in managing the economy. Pretty hard to keep your campaign promises when you inherit 750k job losses per month.

Cycloptichorn

So if someone called your mother a scurvy whore while you were standing right there, and you and your mother didn't "want to be offended", then no harm no foul?

Sure, so when Palin referred yesterday to Obama's 'Shuck and Jive' on Libya, she really meant his awesome dance moves.

And anyone who sees any other message in that is just, well, looking to be offended. Right?

Cycloptichorn

You're only"offensive" to those who feel offended. If you're ignored, than you don't offend.

Colin Powell endorsed Obama for a second term.

http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/10/25/14693729-colin-powell-endorses-obama-for-second-term?lite

Oh, hey! Look who didn't get the point! Imagine my surprise that Snood would post something like that.