Curt served in the Marine Corps for four years and has been a law enforcement officer in Los Angeles for the last 24 years.

50 Responses to “The Left Defends That Poor Misguided Black Female, Susan Rice, From Racist Republican Bullies”

  1. 1


    Black — BS — she is as arab (or persian) as da pimp obie — yeh ya hear me — Obie is just playing the tough A-Hole hoodie pimp role — protecting one o’ his ho’s from big bad whitey. They can all go straight back to ‘ell where they came from.

  2. 2


    Searching for James Clyburn’s defense of Secretary of State, Condi Rice, from the slurs and slanders of his own party because (wait for it) Condi Rice is black. Searching, searching, searching. Nope, can’t find it. Google must be shut down for maintainence.

    Wait, didn’t the DNC spend millions of dollars in Allen West’s district to defeat a (wait for it) black man as they clammor for more (wait for it) blacks to enter politics? Isn’t it racist for the DNC to support West’s white opponent?

    The race card is so dog earred that the Democrats are losing, not gaining, ground. But Obama wanted a divided nation, pitting one race against the other, and that is pretty much now what his boot lickers are doing, from all races.

    We are now governed by someone who suffers from Munchauser by Proxity. He will make us sick so he can take the credit for saving us. Sick, sick, sick.

  3. 5


    Is she dense or an Obama Stooge?

    Obviously, she is an intelligent woman; is it possible our legislators don’t appreciate having a stooge tell us Obama’s lies under the cover of being a minority woman. If Obama is so concerned about women in the public discourse, why does he as the cavalier send a woman out as his point man to spread lies and confusion. He is the one who is disrespecting Rice and compromising her reputation. Liars are liars and political stooges are stooges regardless of gender or ethnicity.

  4. 6

    Nan G

    IF Obama had exhibited 1/10th the passion about the safety of our people in Benghazi as he did to defend Susan Rice, at least two of them might be alive today!
    It might have been partly Susan Rice’s fault that the Americans were attacked.
    Remember that she foisted a gay rights’ agenda into the application for employment for working security at Embassies.
    Can you imagine?
    You are a good Muslim.
    You want to work for Ambassador Stevens.
    Your take home the application and it is FULL of gay agenda stuff.
    Stuff that YOU would be executed for under Sharia.
    You share these facts with other good Muslims.
    Somewhere down the road you get the job but as soon as the attack starts you walk away from your post.
    Islam wins over a mere paycheck.

    Sure, Hillary played her part.
    But it was Susan Rice who publicized this egregious (to good Muslims) new policy on the U.N. floor.

  5. 7


    @Retire05: I believe it is Munchausen by Proxy.
    And I believe that Amb. Rice is a good soldier. She speaks when she is told to speak, and reads her lines with as much conviction as she can muster. She has no intelligence of her own that I can see. What comes to mind is Tolkien: the Mouth of Sauron, who cannot remember his own name.
    The record of Amb. Rice is shameful. She has the same task as NASA, which is to make Islam look good.
    Now it is my distinct recollection that the other Rice, Condoleeza by name, had a mind and a viewpoint of her own, which she expressed to her boss. If Susan Rice has any opinions at all, they are deeply hidden.

    Besides, this endorsement is like so many endorsements in sports. Today you are wonderful, tomorrow you are history. Happens all the time.

    It is a pleasure to see Sens Graham and McCain have opinions on this matter. Hope they have good security guards!

  6. 8


    Doesn’t matter that she went on show after show the day after the attack and mislead the American people.

    What she said was based on the information that had been made available to her at the time. Susan Rice to Chris Wallace, on Fox News Sunday, September 16, 2012:

    “Well, first of all, Chris, we are obviously investigating this very closely. The FBI has a lead in this investigation. The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack.That what happened initially was that it was a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired in Cairo as a consequence of the video. People gathered outside the embassy and then it grew very violent and those with extremist ties joined the fray and came with heavy weapons, which unfortunately are quite common in post-revolutionary Libya and that then spun out of control.

    “But we don’t see at this point signs this was a coordinated plan, premeditated attack. Obviously, we will wait for the results of the investigation and we don’t want to jump to conclusions before then. But I do think it’s important for the American people to know our best current assessment.

    An analogous situation might be Condoleezza Rice’s public statements supporting the Bush administration’s WMD assertion–which, incidentally, were used to rationalize the military invasion and occupation of a nation that posed no immediate threat to the United States. There were doubts about the accuracy of that information. As it turned out, those doubts were well founded. Republicans haven’t condemned Condoleezza Rice because of that.

    It’s apparent that McCain and Graham have unresolved issues that go well beyond the simple matter of Susan Rice’s comments, even though racism and gender issues aren’t necessarily among them.

  7. 9



    So you are trying to hand us that b/s that five days after the Benghazi attack, when it was quite clear that the attack was a terrorist attack and not some upset Muslims over a less than 15 minute video clip, Rice didn’t know?

    “know our best current assessment”

    Well, then; that leaves us two options, doesn’t it? Either Susan Rice, cocktail party devotee, was either lying, or she is totally out of the loop of the Oval Office, because if you think for one nano-second that Obama did not know the attack in Benghazi was executed by terrorists five days after the attack, you are rotting your liver with Obama Koolaid.

  8. 10


    According to Greg and every other Liberal, Obama is the antithesis of Bush; yet, Obama may do everything Bush did, because Bush did. Remarkable, the guy who framed Obama’s first campaign, justifies everything Obama does, with the old childhood excuse, “he did it first”. What a fraud with an army of bootlicking sycophants ready to swear allegiance to every lie. It has reached the point of absurdity, and yet, they wait in line to follow The Won.

  9. 11



    It’s apparent that McCain and Graham have unresolved issues that go well beyond the simple matter of Susan Rice’s comments, even though racism and gender issues aren’t necessarily among them.

    I agree. And their biggest ‘unresolved issue’ is that Obama and his admin have not come forth to tell the public what it knew, when it knew it, and what in the hell they actually did about it, in regards to Benghazi. Graham as much as said that very thing.

    You could say that we are making a mountain out of a mole-hill. But I’d counter that you are not giving it the seriousness that such an incident requires. Nor is Obama or our media.

  10. 12


    Of course if you remove the context of anything’s easy to say this equals that. One person is shot by police trying to kill someone. Another person is shot by a gangster he owed money. They are both dead. They were both shot. Same thing. The situation with Iraq intel was an entirely different scenario. The intel trying to verify information and descrepancies happened “Prior” to invading Iraq. Not after. AFter it was all over, and we invaded Iraq and went from one side to the other…then it was clear what we knew..and that earlier intel was wrong.

    The issue here is…we can’t get clear information or documents “AFTER” the fact. The event has already happened. And it seems there’s discrepancies after the fact. Nobody is clear about what they know or understand. That’s different. Secondly, Condie was at an appropriate level and position to be making those statements. Rice was not. She was clearly acting as voice box from the whitehouse…which is what Obama confirmed today. Also today…nobody in the CIA or intel division seems to know who made those talking points for her. Because they were clearly “wrong” and at odds with the CIA’s “own” intel and facts as they understood them at the time. That’s hard to ascertain clearly because according to reports today…some of the intel chiefs…are basically saying…yes…that’s our brief…it’s obviously wrong, but we don’t know who made it.

    That’s different…when it happens AFTER the fact as people are trying to put a timeline, etc..together in an investigation….than trying to assess pre-war intel on a country we had no contact with for years.

    And if you want to play tit-for-tat games….then lets just please do remember how democrats and progressives treated Condie. How much respect she got. If there were any comparison to be made here….republicans would break into Rice’s hearing..and stand in front of her, get up in her face waving bloody hands.

    There are no coincidences in Washington. And anytime you start seeing a bunch of them crop up….you can be assured something is up/behind it. It may be something realtively minor…somebody just trying to cover their ass. Or it could be something even bigger. And this has all the hallmarks already of being something that stinks to high heaven. Perhaps it will come out that they were just stalling and etc out of incompetence. I see that already.

    I think at this point…it will be a miracle if we EVER figure out exactly what happened.

  11. 13


    @retire05, #9:

    The election is over. The politically motivated Benghazi narrative—which a majority of Americans never bought into—obviously didn’t work. There’s still good reason to determine the facts surrounding the attack, as there has been from the moment it happened, but I fail to see how the persecution of Susan Rice serves the cause of furthering that investigation.

    I think she’s being persecuted out of frustration and petty vindictiveness. Such behavior is unbecoming members of the U.S. Senate. They’re more likely to diminish themselves than the actual object of their anger.

  12. 14

    Common Sense

    @Greg: BTW, the Democrats seen the same intelligence Rice and the President saw and concurred with it. Otherwise why did they vote to support the war?? A fact you simply will never grasp. This time the intelligence sources are NOT being disclosed because they don’t exist!! Tell what intelligence agency said what occurred in Benghazi was a video??

  13. 15



    I think she’s being persecuted out of frustration and petty vindictiveness. Such behavior is unbecoming members of the U.S. Senate.

    Oh, that’s a good one. Remind us where you called out Senator Reid for unfounded persecution of Romney for tax evasion. Remind us where you called that act “unbecoming” of a US Senator.

    We’ll all wait patiently for you to link those for us.

  14. 16



    Seems you are reduced to parroting the DNC talking points. “Benghazi is a politically motivated narrative. Fast and Furious is a poltically motivated narrative.” Seems you are stuck on the same old talking points.


    And I, for one, want to know why. You see, those bullets that took the lives of four Americans that this administration abandoned didn’t care about your talking points. So I guess we can use your benchmark and declare that Watergate was a poltically motivated narrative and Iran-Contra was a poltically motivated narrative, and Valerie Plame was a poltically motivated narrative. Seems you need to wipe your chin.

  15. 17


    I apologize. I cannot resist.
    It is not making a mountain out of a mole hill. It is making truth out of a mole-shill.

    And Amb. Rice is a shill (carnival barker for the Obama Carnival).

  16. 18


    @Common Sense, #14:

    It was a logical first assumption that the video, which triggered violent demonstrations across much of the Muslim world, had likely had a similar effect in Benghazi. Numerous U.S. diplomatic facilities became the focuses of protests. The demonstration in Cairo, which resulted in a breach of the embassy perimeter, was going on at the same time the Benghazi mission was attacked, and was obviously related to the video.

  17. 19

    Common Sense

    @Greg: First assumption by whom in Benghazi? It was 9/11 and Benghazi has communicated it’s intelligence assessment that a terrorist attack was imminent!! The idea that a video with NO intelligence feedback to that effect in Benghazi smells of the cover up it was.

  18. 20



    Except there wasn’t an “assumption” needed. There were eyes in the air 17 mins after the attack began that observed what happened. And this the entire point. According to the little we know…the CIA “knew” that it wasn’t a demonstration over the video gone bad from the very beginning. The questions then start from there. WHY if they knew it..other’s didn’t. And why wasn’t there a response. And who was tasked with that? And why the president didn’t know that (if he indeed didn’t). He’s already said both things. He’s said he “did” understand it to be a direct terrorist attack (debate 3). And he’s also said or implied it was not.

    I don’t blame Rice, nor do I think she should be persecuted for doing what she was told to do. I don’t think she made up her own intel. I question the president sending her…particularly under the circumstances where it was already understood that it was NOT related to video riots. Because she wasn’t giving a “presentation” as the president worded it. She was DEFENDING the idea that this was not a direct attack. Becuase the implications and questions might be different depending upon whether this was a direct, coordinated attack by terrorists with heavy weapons…..vs….a bunch of angry shop keepers throwing their sandals getting out of control.

    They already know which it was. They just don’t want to talk about it. And when they do…they try to limit their conversation to as little as possible…and usually leave more questions than they answer. How the CIA could not know who made the talking points that Rice used is ridiculous. If you ask me…the WH “shopped” around for somebody they thought would be sympathetic. Rice’s whole thing was also prelim to Obama’s UN speech..which happened even LATER and focused these events entirely through the scope of the video protest and religous tolerance. It took 14 days before he finally admitted…that we knew it was not related to the video.

    I’m waiting for them to come out and start saying that it “was” a demonstration again. Just keep it all going in circles and spinning off other things trying to make it go away. That’s not Rice doing that.

  19. 21



    “The demonstration in Cairo, which resulted in a breach of an embassy parimeter, was going on at the same time the Benghazi mission was attacked, and was obviously related to the video.”

    So, once again, you are going to parrot the administration’s talking points? Well, that little excuse just happens to be wrong, as well. You see, Greggie, eventually the truth surfaces, and the truth of Cairo protest is that it was NOT due to some less than 15 minute video clip.

    Nic Robertson, of CNN, on September 11, 2012, interviewed not only the brother of the Blind Sheikh, but Al Zawahiri’s brother, who both said that the protest was to demand the release from prison of the Blind Sheikh. But, I guess if there are those who want to believe that you know more than the people who actually organized the Cairo protest, then you can offer them some Obama Koolaid for their pleasure, as well.

    Greggie, there are a number of liberals who can lie and get by with it. You are not one of them.

  20. 23



    It is because you have no argument, Greggie. You are consistantly wrong on every issue, and when proven wrong, you hide under your bed.

    The reality is that the story of the Cairo protests was hatched by the White House, with the help of CNN who refused to air Nic Robertson’s video from Cairo on September 11th. But Robertson’s video report came out anyway, and it destroyed the lies of the White House. You cannot dispute that, so you run and hide like the little weasel you have proven yourself to be.

    If you are an example of the Obama voter, then it goes without saying that the lowest intellectual percentile voted for Obama.

  21. 24


    @retire05, #23:

    Pandering to the delusions and extremism of the far right just cost the GOP both the White House and a Senate majority, under a set of circumstances that should have made victory a relative cake walk. Some don’t seem to have learned a thing from their error yet. I’m convinced that many have, however. I expect mass desertions in the direction of moderation and compromise when the matter of taxes and sequestration come up. The front of Grover Norquist’s suit will be covered with footprints. This phenomenon will be an example of what is commonly known as regaining one’s sanity.

    On a personal note, you really need to work on expanding your repertoire of insults. The reliable old standbys are beginning to seem as wearily repetitious as a week of Rush Limbaugh.

  22. 25



    Greggie, here is your problem; you throw up a strawman, and then when someone comes along with a match, and your strawman goes up in smoke, you run and hide. You never address anything that doesn’t match your talking points, like proof that the Cairo protest had nothing to do with some stupid movie clip.

    Instead, you continue to offer only more pablum, more DNC talking points, thinking you are the sharpest knife in the drawer when all you are doing is proving you are nothing more than a parrot. You are so intellectually dishonest you can’t bring yourself to say “Gee, retire, I didn’t know about that Nic Robertson interview in Cairo, but thanks for making me more informed.” Instead, we get the mindless dribble about a mass exodus and right wing extremism along with some absolutely stupid comments about Grover Norquist which has NOTHING to do with the subject at hand.

    As to my insults toward you; I have told you before, I consider you an enemy of the nation. I have no respect for you, and no desire to sit in some circle with you singing Kumbaya. I can only assume you are painfully uneducated or educated by left wing radicals that laugh at your gullibility. There is a reason people like you are called “useful” idiots.

    Remember this, Greggie; the U.S. is a ever shifting nation. And while you may enjoy the forcing of your Socialist utopian dreams on the populace now, that pendulum never rests. Eventually it swings back the other direction, and the harder it swings your way now, the harder it will swing when it comes back. And don’t be surprised if that pendulum smacks you in the head on its way.

  23. 26

    Common Sense

    @retire05: Retire 05: Poor Greegie is a lost cause. If you ask him to prove any of his accusations or the accusations of his heroes like 0-blama and Reid he will move the argument somewhere else. He is less than genuine with any of his comments. Give him enough time and he will get around to blaming Republicans and or Bush for every failure that 0-blama and the Democrats have foisted on America in the past 4 years!! He was certain Romney didn’t pay any taxes because Reid said so on the floor of the Senate. I asked for proof and of course I am still waiting.

  24. 28

    FAITH 7

    Why make a “statement” at all???… especially, if you are [ahem] not ‘sure’ of what transpired [cough, cough] to begin with?????

    Gee, why not say something happened we are not sure of the details will bring the story when more details come out…. Instead of all the bull shi! drama and LIES…?!?

    What happened in Bengazi is such a shame and now it seems it is becoming a sham…

    And oozing of hypocrisy…as usual…from the Left…

    I guess it never, ever, comes into their very small minds [because they ‘forget’ a lot] the repulsive name calling and vitriol aimed at Sara Palin AND her family….BY THE LEFT in the not so distant past…

    So, why is the Left now worried about Rice??… and legitimate questions and comments directed about her??

    And I guess, well, the freebie culture [cult is more like it] doesn’t mind being LIED to by their Government aka Shameless Gifter in Chief so long as the “Gifter” that keeps givin’….. keeps on givin’ …..

    Yep…Sheep to the slaughter…

  25. 31


    Democrats are so fond of declaring that race is not relevant to a person’s qualification for office. We agree. Yet when we take issue with their actions in office or what they say as a public official, Democrats insist that Republicans are only doing so because of racism. What Dems are really saying, is that Democrats (especially those of an ethnic minority,) can not be held to the same standards as Republicans. That is ideological bigotry.

    Honestly, I didn’t know until today that Susan Rice was black, I just considered her an American. Now, Democrats are declaring that we must recognize her race, and that because they know that she is black, to speak out against her can only be due to racism. I say that is total h*rse-sh*t.

    So basically Obama threw Rice out on the Sunday talk shows to be his spokesperson with orders to disseminate a lie to the public, not once but five times. Obama himself soon afterwards repeated the exact same boldface lie to the entire world in his UN appearance. Both of them did this days after they knew that what the were saying was patently false. Neither of their hands are clean in this cover-up of four murders that may have been prevented if the administration had not been totally incompetent in their failing to give our Ambassador (who was in fear for his life,) the increased security he was asking for many weeks prior to 9/11/2012!

    I don’t think that being a congenital lying sock-puppet qualifies a person to be Secretary of State. (Although I admit Hillary did set a precedent.)

  26. 32


    four murders that may have been prevented if the administration had not been totally incompetent in their failing to give our Ambassador (who was in fear for his life,) the increased security he was asking for many weeks prior to 9/11/2012!

    But, it’s not “just” that Ditto. Even after dropping the ball beforehand, the four murders may have been prevented the day of the attack. Nobody helped them. And we know we had assets that could have. While this is also still unclear…the only information we have is that the 2 former navy seals who were killed…actually “defied” orders to try and help. What “were” those orders that they defied?? According to reporting….it was to “stand down”. Twice, they were told to stand down.

    I mean…any which way you turn….there are some serious implications in all this. And at this point, I think all it’s going to take is for someone to pull one of the many strings hanging loose…and this think is going to unravel. It would appear…though…that the angle on this is going to be gross incompetence. (which the democrats and liberals will say should be totally excusable…innocent). The State dept thought the Libyan’s would handle the ‘protest’. By the time CIA reported rang the red phone to say this wasn’t a demonstration but a direct assault and that the ambassador’s compound was under attack, Obama did what he does best…assemble a meeting to discuss it…then assign or appoint someone else to handle it and be responsible for it (he said…he told his national security team…to do what was necessary). I’m just gonna guess..the timeline will show by the time the president assembled his security team to have a joint meeting and discuss the attack….it was mostly over. This would be typical of this president…who has trouble doing anything off a prompter or that isn’t rehearsed.

    As the CIA watches all this unfold…I’m guessing they were on the phone, waiting for contingency forces to step in…that never came. The CIA was running a covert operation there. They aren’t a reactionary force….nor would they want to expose their operation….which would explain why the 2 former navy seal operatives were told to “stand down”…..twice. They defied orders…and were able to get some out, and recover the body of the ambassadors aide. They returned to the annex where it came under attack. The 2 navy seals were killed at the CIA annex…not at the ambassadors compound. The annex is now also exposed as an operation where the CIA has prisoners/interrogations.

    What Libyan force that was there..was purposefully inadequate and only there to quell minor protest …police action. There was also prior evidence that the compound was being watched by police and that it was being setup. The Libyan forces were assaulted with heavy weapons and were quickly overwhelmed.

    Exit Question: how many “Libyan” forces protecting the compound were killed in this attack?

  27. 33

    FAITH 7

    @Greg #24 – No, Greg, that isn’t the reason the GOP lost…

    I ask you…
    Why is it so “Extreme” to Liberals to live within our means? Why is it so “Extreme” to Liberals to give “equal opportunity” to everyone?… “opportunity” has always been there for the taking…like anything else – you have to go and get it… BUT! but, if you are not willing…and you are sitting on you arse waiting for it to come to you…well…who’s fault is that? Not mine!! and certainly not everyone else’s…

    Every company by Law has to have a sign posted depicting the Equal Opportunity Employer Laws – No matter who you are, if you have the skills we are seeking for a specific job/function which we are offering to the public…and you possess those skills… well the rest is up to the person applying for the Job… Period.

    Why is it so ‘extreme’ for those who are working albiet at jobs where they are making substantially less than four years ago not able to keep more of what they earn??? While everything else has/is going up in price? Why are they subject to propping up the rest of the country because ‘they’ [yes, they Greg] ‘want’ gifts?

    You want fairness?? I ask you… What “gifts” do those who get up and work everyday get??????? [Oh, wait, I’ll answer that!! More money taken from them]

    Liberals and those who perpetuate the cradle to grave [gifts from the Gifter in chief] dogma that has engulfed this America….is, of course going to get the votes…what have we been warned about in the past?

    Well, now what happens when there is no more unemployment money next year? No extensions to the unemployment coiffures? And, these “Gifts” which of course, the “voters” voted for are no longer available??? What happens then?

    You, Greg, are in deep denial and reality really does elude you…

  28. 34

    Liberal1 (Objectivity)

    But where, in the article by Curt, is the evidential argument against the statement “…that that was the best intelligence information that she had at the time?” Nowhere. His article is just full of non-factual innuendos and pejoratives and racial statements—incidently, I hear more about racism from the conservative-entertainment-news-complex than I ever hear from the Left. Oh well, we’ve got to give them some slack; after all, they just lost the world’s most important election and are still mourning.

  29. 35


    @Liberal1 (Objectivity):

    OK, so let’s assume that Rice was simply giving the “best intelligence she had at the time just for argumments sake. Then we have one of two senarios: either she is out of the loop, would not have been given access to the emails that clearly named an AQ affiliate as the source of the attack, and simply received her information from the direction of the Oval Office, who lied to her as Obama knew, within hours, who initiated the attack. That makes her incompetent and nothing more than a talking head for the administration.

    Or she lied.

    Which is it, Lib1?

  30. 36


    The best intel they had at the time…differed from what Rice said. I agree that Rice was scapegoated in this and shouldn’t be….although I would still question why “she” was sent as an outsider. My guess would be because she’s good at staying on point (which is why she’s at the UN). But, that’s not her fault.

    The CIA intel that was sent in to form those talking points….was altered or changed in one respect. It was CIA’s position (at the time the report was made) that this was a direct terrorist attack by an AlQueda affiliate org. That was the best intel we had at that point and time. That was “changed” by someone before it was given to Rice to remove the word “terrorist attack” and reference to AlQueda and was replaced with the view that it was mainly a protest over video which evolved and that there were some extremist present. This was done..when as time went forward…the intel supporting the view that it was spontaneous or over the video was “loosing” steam…not gaining it. But, the talking points from the WH continued to move forward with the “old” altered talking points…despite it being known at some point…that it was not accurate. Least we forget Obama went to the UN the following week after…and continued to focus on the video/spontaneous riot meme.

    This is another case of the admin…wanting to white wash a terrorist attack on Obama’s watch to downplay it and write it off a something else (a criminal act, extremist act, terrible act, etc). This is exactly what the President did in his speech as well….refusing to call it an act of terrorism. Same as with Nidal Hassan at Ft Hood who’s mentor was the head of AlQueda in Yemen! Who yelled Allah Akbhar before opening fire on his fellow soldiers. Or the underwear bomber who only failed because his device did. A loner…wanna be. Same with the guy who’s truck bomb didn’t go off in Time Sq. Or the backpack bombers who failed to complete their mission bombing the subway’s in NY (just kids I guess).

    They just don’t want to use the “t” word. So, somebody edited it out references to terrorism leaving the report more focused on the “spontaneous event” line before giving to Rice. Who? Why? Yet to be determined. Evidently nobody knows who actually compiled the report from each agency into that document.

    I suppose now that liberals are going to argue its completely ok and normal for someone to cherry pick intel or change it up a bit to suit white house talking points?

  31. 37


    @Liberal1 (Objectivity):

    —incidently, I hear more about racism from the conservative-entertainment-news-complex than I ever hear from the Left.

    You are the little Dem who cries “Racism!” We refuse to take your word for anything because you lie so much. Prove it! That is your onus. There were no racist statements whatsoever in Curt’s article. But Lib we are all acquainted with your inability to read and comprehend simple English without parsing out and dissembling imaginary strawmen which do not exist anywhere in that which you read or “heard”.

  32. 39

    Nan G

    @Dc: The best intel they had at the time…differed from what Rice said.
    …..Rice was scapegoated …..
    The CIA intel that was sent in to form those talking points….was altered or changed in one respect. It was CIA’s position (at the time the report was made) that this was a direct terrorist attack by an AlQueda affiliate org. That was the best intel we had at that point and time. That was “changed” by someone before it was given to Rice to remove the word “terrorist attack” and reference to AlQueda and was replaced with the view that it was mainly a protest over video which evolved and that there were some extremist present……

    In olden days a knight in shining armor might come to the rescue of a maiden……but in Obama’s case, he was the one who scapegoated Ms. Rice (she won’t use her husband’s last name) in the first place!

    So, maybe the reason Obama ”used” Ms. Rice is simple:
    Hillary wouldn’t do it.
    Panetta wouldn’t do it.
    Patraeus wouldn’t do it.
    Even Donalin wouldn’t do it.
    Rice could only do it the way she did it……with complete deniability as to what the content of her message was.
    And, within days of having done it, she was leaning on that excuse.

    I see that no one in her past ever told her to go jump off a cliff.
    I see no reason she wouldn’t have done it….based on her willingness to act the parrot or mime.

  33. 40


    Here is the part I love with all of this. Before the election all we heard was, ” Oh, those mean Republicans are trying to influence the election with the Bengahzi attack/I mean protest,,umm,, err. What I mean to say is,,, uhh, SHAME! Playing politics with the lives of our brave diplomats”. Now we hear the tired old refrain. ” Hey you racist Republicans, the election is over. You’re just upset that you lost. Get over it.” Does anyone besides me get a little worn out from all the BS?

  34. 41


    GENERAL PETRAEUS SAID the paper wording was change when it got to her, they remove THE WORD AIQAEDA,
    to not hurt their feeling, that mean the wording was taken of by OBAMA, he’s the only one afraid to hurt ALQAEDA’s feelings,
    I wish, he could have been afraid to have
    and gone out of his way to provide the help they ask for so many times, he might be racist, you don’t see him explode
    to give help to a white person in need.

  35. 42

    Richard Wheeler

    Bees You’re saying Obama didn’t aide the 4 who died in Benghazi because they were white.
    Do you actually believe that?

    If so I truly feel sorry for you. You’re hatred has stripped you of any humanity you had left. Sad

  36. 43


    Richard Wheeler
    any thing we can think of is justified, until we have the better explanation.

  37. 44

    Common Sense

    @Richard Wheeler: I agree Richard, 0-blama did NOT cover up Benghazi because these men where white that would be racism. None the less he covered up the truth for political gain which is even worse!! It was changed to protect his campaign strategy to include “Al Qaeda is on the run”. Truly pathetic but true!! Now he will find cover from Democrats and the MSM and his responsibility for changing the CIA intelligence which clearly indicated terrorism by Al Qaeda. It will remain a supposed mystery but the truth is obvious.

  38. 45

    Richard Wheeler

    Common Sense It’s one thing to assert admin altered responsibility for attack on consulate. Quite another to assert admin purposely or negligently allowed this attack to happen.
    As Tom reminds us, someone here suggested “Obama watched the attack in real time and did nothing.”Who said that? Who believes that?

  39. 46

    Hard Right

    At best, it was negligence rich. You know it too. Just once, show some class and balls and admit your dem heros at the WH and State Dept. blew it.

  40. 47

    Common Sense

    @Richard Wheeler: Richard, I made no such accusation that 0-blama “allowed” this to happen. I do not know if he watched or just members of his administration watched. Either way no help was provided this is known. My assertion which I stand by is that 0-blama altered the CIA intelligence report for political gain, this I stand by until proof otherwise. The political gain is that his story was Bin Laden is dead and Al Qaeda is “on the run”. Bin Laden IS dead thanks to our brave men in uniform. As for Al Qaeda on the run, the terrorist attack on the consulate in Benghazi would certainly cast doubt on that assertion. especially on 9/11. What is also known at this point is that a request was made for additional security by Benghazi which was not provided. Much to be known relevant to this fact but I hope more light will be shed upon the denial of this request. As to “who said that” makes little difference relevant to the lives lost.

  41. 48

    Richard Wheeler

    Common Sense I didn’t suggest YOU said Obama ALLOWED the attack to happen but others here have said so. There is NO proof of that.
    I am hopeful the whole truth emerges. I’ ll with hold further comment till then.

    Hi Bees

  42. 49


    a great idea, yes, SARAH PALIN THE GREAT,
    she would be knoking their heads on each other down,
    wow we would have someone to believe on the lib side,
    but we can dream can we?