Why not Obama instead of Rice? (suspected, extremist, death, terrorists)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Even Obama admitted she had nothing to do with any of it. Who better to press the story than someone who didn't know the real story? Why else would they trot her out there?
They trotted her out there for the very reason you mentioned. Maybe they had some thoughts about getting her known so as to replace Hillary, also. I think they went the wrong direction with that, though.
What's the matter with you people. Susan Rice was no more than the pizza delivery person as far as the Benghazi affair goes. President Obama has already said as far as Benghazi is concerned, "Bring it on" "Attack me if you need to attack anybody". But republican politicians won't give it up for Rice because the want to go after Rice for the reasons I've outlined more than once in this thread. Going after Rice has absolutely nothing at all to do with Benghazi or what she said about it. It's the Senate seat stupid!
What do you want from a freaking wuss! A lying scumbag wuss he is. People lie for one reason, and one reason only.
They don't want the real truth to come out, most of us could figure this out.
Obama cannot accept and bear no responsibility for any of his wrong doings, making excuses for him, does not help the situation. He knew more then he is telling, what are we all stupid now.
A liar is a liar, tells one lie, the rest get bigger. But truth always has a way of prevailing. And sometimes those who are guilty pay no conseuences.
Lied for how many weeks, when they knew give me a freaking break here. They knew, and are covering up their butt's.
I really think this story involves a lot more than covering butts, but now that the election is over they think they are home free. Yes, I think there was a covert desire to get rid of Stevens before he told some things he knew. If that is not true, why didn't they try to save him?
Please educate me. Why all the attention, fixation and so much media coverage regarding Susan Rice, when, it was Obama himself that went to the United Nations and made that speech regarding the alleged video. He even sort of admitted he is the one who gave the talking points to her. It seems to me what he did was far worse. Going before the UN making a fool out of himself and the United States. Where am I going wrong?
You aren't going wrong. The buck stops with the head honcho.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dockside
He is a coward who likes to hide behind women's skirts and the MSM lets him get away with it.
Yep. I think deep down he hates women.
I don't see anybody giving 0bama a free pass. Well, except the media. And goofy low IQ 0bots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robin Rossi
I find that when poster go, mindless and vacuously, after Fox News, Rush, Sean, Mark etc., they have nothing to stand on except the soles of their feet. Dismiss them as irrelevant, I say.
Yep. That good ol' ignore button works wonders to free one's life of the irrelevant clutter.
that may be so but I'm here to inform anybody who will take the time to listen, that the attacks on Susan Rice, who probably knew less about Benghazi than anybody else in the administration, is a political ploy by Republicans McCain and Graham to derail her nomination so Kerry will get it by default. Then the repubs can run Scott Brown for the empty senate seat and most likely win it.
I wish people would stop sniping at each other and see what's really going on here. McCain is in the process of trying to give the US senate a full wedgie while everyone is distracted.
You are so right about Rice knowing nothing, but why did she allow them to use her to put out that lie? It may be that McCain is trying to use her but Obama had already used her to put out his lie.
Petraeus gave his testimony YESTERDAY. King has remarked on it both YESTERDAY and TODAY.
And King has not said in any of his remarks that Petraeus claimed that the information provided by him after the attack was changed by anyone, in or out of the CIA.
And I'm sorry, yes consulate in Benghazi. Wow, I should be shot for saying embassy instead of consulate!
I knew that you knew better on the consulate thing but just couldn't keep from using it against you kind of like many lefties here like to do when they can.
Now, I will offer you a chance to hear what King said this morning, after the hearing, by telling you that I have it posted on the board right now.
What's the matter with you people. Susan Rice was no more than the pizza delivery person .... Rice has absolutely nothing at all to do with Benghazi
"What's the matter with you" - you sound like an Italian grandmother
I disagree. I think she had a much more pivotal role in the region.
Which tells me, she, more than anyone, would know this attack
couldn't possibly be "because of an isolated video".
Does she not ask questions or is she just a news commentator
And if that's the case, she certainly would not be qualified to be Secretary of State, would she?
They may be positioning her now as unknowing, but I don't
believe it for a minute.
Cowards are those who accuse someone when the person can't defend. Get it Roy?
And the President is challenging the accusers to go after him instead. But in your little world that runs only goes backwards, THAT is a bad thing.
Sheeee it it is tough to have to put up with the kind of reasoning you throw around. I believe that you just can't see that an attack on her, about this situation, is an attack on The Won who sent her out there that day.
I just heard King say again that Petraeus said that he didn't know who put out that story she told but it sure wasn't what the CIA had told the White House. Keep trying Ghost.
What's the matter with you people. Susan Rice was no more than the pizza delivery person as far as the Benghazi affair goes. President Obama has already said as far as Benghazi is concerned, "Bring it on" "Attack me if you need to attack anybody". But republican politicians won't give it up for Rice because the want to go after Rice for the reasons I've outlined more than once in this thread. Going after Rice has absolutely nothing at all to do with Benghazi or what she said about it. It's the Senate seat stupid!
Going after Rice is going after the man who appointed her to her job and then allowed someone in the White House to send her out with a lie to tell all those people. It may be that what you want to be the case really is the case, but attacking her is attacking The Won who will be exposed before all this is over.
Hmm, the old "attack the messenger" debate trick. Dude, people only do that when they've lost the argument. And their dignity.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
