• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Why is the GOP all giddy an ambassador was killed?

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Carfax83

Diamond Member
Nov 1, 2010
6,050
850
126
There is when he's going off half-cocked with no actual knowledge of what is going on, and makes himself look so partisan and obnoxious that even people on his side criticize him for it.
Sounds similar to Susan Rice going on every cable news and prematurely blaming the well coordinated embassy attack on a silly youtube video..

And the President himself bringing up the youtube video a number of times during his U.N address speech..

Romney on the other hand, knew something had to the wrong because the facts (as I outlined earlier) didn't align well with what the Administration was saying.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Shane and disgust, shame and disgust, appealing to the brain of reptiles. Why didn't that stupid shameful Bush nuke Afghanistan when he knew plans were afoot to harm thousands of innocent Americans. That disgusting fucker's lack of capacity to comprehend intelligence reports killed thousands of Americans. Shove that up your ass and smoke it.

And trust me, you don't have the faintest idea what I am really saying.
Breakdowns in communications; fiefdoms is typical government issue.
Started under Carter and unable to be busted up by Bush due to lack of information being available when needed.

No one can know what you are stating because what you choose to state is not intended to make sense.
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Republicans in congress have their own skeletons to answer for when they twice voted down funding for the state department--you know, the money that was needed to keep the guards in place for the time allotted.

This was Issa that voted it down, btw. And Chutzekkawhatshisface.

THe investigation has determined that an allotment of extra marines/security (which was never requested) would not have significantly thwarted this attack. The embassy only requested that the current guards assigned to their post, at the time, be allowed to continue past their contracted time period. This was disallowed because, well, Issa denied them the funds.

anyway, it's political horseshit played out by scummery.
GOP/congress does not allocate money on an country by country basis for security.

A budget was authorized for State to use for security - State determined where they were going to use it.
State refused to look at what the front lines were saying; ignoring intelligence because they did not want to here such.
 
Last edited:

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,190
6,239
136
...

What's amazing is that the leftist media has decided to completely ignore the massive failures of the administration in this case (and the subsequent lies), but instead wants to turn it and cast blame on Romney instead. There's no bias though :whiste:
Heh, owned by the facts, must be time for you to deflect. Nice choice going with the standard librul media option.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Romney sensed a breakdown and exploited it for political gain.
It turns out he was right - there was a drastic breakdown in the administration that may have allowed the situation.
then there was the denials by the administration - again pointing out a situational awareness issue.
Now we find out that the Administration is claiming they knew nothing about the breakdown. - In essence blaming State for the foulup.
Sorry, but you're engaging in some pretty blatant revisionism here.

The statement from Romney that was roundly criticized was NOT related to any "sensing of a breakdown". Here is what he said:

Romney said:
&#8220;I&#8217;m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American Consulate worker in Benghazi,&#8221; Mr. Romney said in a statement. &#8220;It&#8217;s disgraceful that the Obama administration&#8217;s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.&#8221;
That comment was not germaine, not accurate, and not based on facts or full understanding of what had transpired. It was entirely politically-motivated and shameful.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,705
3,512
126
Sorry, but you're engaging in some pretty blatant revisionism here.

The statement from Romney that was roundly criticized was NOT related to any "sensing of a breakdown". Here is what he said:



That comment was not germaine, not accurate, and not based on facts or full understanding of what had transpired. It was entirely politically-motivated and shameful.
What would you expect of somebody who would support the 47% dying in Viet Nam to save democracy and run to France to spread the magic of underwear?
 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,599
5
0
Sorry, but you're engaging in some pretty blatant revisionism here.

The statement from Romney that was roundly criticized was NOT related to any "sensing of a breakdown". Here is what he said:

Originally Posted by Romney
&#8220;I&#8217;m outraged by the attacks on American diplomatic missions in Libya and Egypt and by the death of an American Consulate worker in Benghazi,&#8221; Mr. Romney said in a statement. &#8220;It&#8217;s disgraceful that the Obama administration&#8217;s first response was not to condemn attacks on our diplomatic missions, but to sympathize with those who waged the attacks.&#8221;

That comment was not germaine, not accurate, and not based on facts or full understanding of what had transpired. It was entirely politically-motivated and shameful.
What was the Obama's Administration response to the attacks?

Dd they attempt to attach responsibility to the video as enraging the locals and causing the result?

The administration was going to punish the people responsible.

Three areas:
  • The lack of security provided by the host county.
  • The people that performed the attacks
  • The US State people that refused to listen to the requests for support.

And now you have State people defending the decision to not provide the requested assistance before the attacks.

At present, what punishment has been handed out.

the way romney handled it was wrong; however the end result has been correct.

The Administration screwed up; did not want to assign responsibility and has made the US look weaker in that are of the world.
 
Nov 30, 2006
15,468
389
121
The GOP is all giddy because an ambassador was killed? OP is a liar and a troll. Why do the mods allow this kind of crap in this forum?
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
What was the Obama's Administration response to the attacks?
You're trying to change the subject, which was Romney's statement before facts were known, and your inaccurate characterization of same.

I'm not going to defend the Obama administration's handling of this affair. But that doesn't make what Romney did right -- nor what you are doing in trying to pretend Romney somehow presciently knew there was a screwup.

You'd score more points if you were at least intellectually honest enough to admit that you got your facts wrong, rather than just trying to divert.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
The only problem, EagleKeeper, is that Romney jumped on the issue before anyone knew that there had been any "breakdown". His behavior was shameful.
BS. Whitehouse knew of the "breakdown" but tried to keep it hush-hush, and people like you let it slide.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
You guys bitching about Romney, yet your savior decided to campaign that day. His re-election was more important than the attack on an embassy. You libs sicken me.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
You guys bitching about Romney, yet your savior decided to campaign that day. His re-election was more important than the attack on an embassy. You libs sicken me.
Is there some part of "I'm not going to defend the Obama administration's handling of this affair. But that doesn't make what Romney did right..." that's too difficult for you to understand?
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
66,705
3,512
126
Not relevant to Romney's comments. See post #30.
He's feeling disgust and needs to demonize so reason flew out the window. The logic you gave in post 30 is indisputable and yet it is in an altered reality.

In fact, CPA will become now more convinced that he is right than he was moments ago.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
Not relevant to Romney's comments. See post #30.
how was it shameful? This was the initial response:

The U.S. Embassy in Cairo had issued a statement saying, in part, that it condemns "the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions." The statement, an apparent reference to the video, was posted hours before the Americans' death in Libya was reported.
Romney's comments were accurate.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Heh, owned by the facts, must be time for you to deflect. Nice choice going with the standard librul media option.
Owned by facts? Are you drunk? No facts have been presented to support the ludicrous idea that anyone in the gop is "giddy" over an ambassador getting killed. Complete fail. Now the focus is on Romney pointing out the failures instead of on the people responsible for the actual failures. Again, complete fail.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
He's feeling disgust and needs to demonize so reason flew out the window. The logic you gave in post 30 is indisputable and yet it is in an altered reality.

In fact, CPA will become now more convinced that he is right than he was moments ago.
Yep, you are right, I am demonizing, just as the OP is. However, your righteous indignation is, like usual, one sided.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
Romney's comments were accurate.
Romney said 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."

That never happened. The embassy made the statements BEFORE the attacks. And there is no evidence that they did so on Obama's instructions anyway.

Even that aside, Eaglekeeper's characterizations of Romney's comments as being because he "somehow knew" that the administration screwed up are obviously false.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
26,190
6,239
136
Owned by facts? Are you drunk? No facts have been presented to support the ludicrous idea that anyone in the gop is "giddy" over an ambassador getting killed. Complete fail. Now the focus is on Romney pointing out the failures instead of on the people responsible for the actual failures. Again, complete fail.
Yes, Romney is not in fact smiling in the pictures posted above. Pictures taken of him talking only about one thing: this incident. And Romney is also not, in fact, part of the GOP.
 

CPA

Elite Member
Nov 19, 2001
30,324
4
0
Romney said 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."

That never happened. The embassy made the statements BEFORE the attacks. And there is no evidence that they did so on Obama's instructions anyway.

Even that aside, Eaglekeeper's characterizations of Romney's comments as being because he "somehow knew" that the administration screwed up are obviously false.
hmmm...after some additional research, it seems that the timing of the Cairo office communication was before the death. So, with that, I back off my stance.

I will add, but not argue against you, that as much as Romney may have played a political card, Hillary's statements should have left out the issue of religious tolerance. It would have been much better for her to just say "the attach was unjustified under any reason".
 

Orignal Earl

Diamond Member
Oct 27, 2005
8,059
55
86
hmmm...after some additional research, it seems that the timing of the Cairo office communication was before the death. .
Additional research?
You mean you finished reading your whole quote above?

The U.S. Embassy in Cairo had issued a statement saying, in part, that it condemns "the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims &#8212; as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions." The statement, an apparent reference to the video, was posted hours before the Americans' death in Libya was reported.
 

PokerGuy

Lifer
Jul 2, 2005
13,652
199
101
Yes, Romney is not in fact smiling in the pictures posted above. Pictures taken of him talking only about one thing: this incident. And Romney is also not, in fact, part of the GOP.
Unless you have a magical way of reading his mind, you have absolutely no way to know what he's smiling about. For all you know it's just his standard politician fake smile that they all have. Finding a frame of him with a silly smirk on his face =/= proof that he is "giddy" about someone getting murdered by terrorists. Feel free to assume whatever you want and make illogical leaps of faith though.
 

Charles Kozierok

Elite Member
May 14, 2012
6,762
0
0
hmmm...after some additional research, it seems that the timing of the Cairo office communication was before the death. So, with that, I back off my stance.
Thanks.

That is in fact what people were mostly outraged against. Also, if you think about it, they may well have made those statements trying to defuse potential violence... I don't blame them for being scared. I would have been.

I will add, but not argue against you, that as much as Romney may have played a political card, Hillary's statements should have left out the issue of religious tolerance. It would have been much better for her to just say "the attach was unjustified under any reason".
Not sure which statement you're referring to. Only one I could find was this, which seems to me entirely reasonable, saying clearly that we don't support denigrating religious beliefs but that that is not an excuse for violence:

Hillary Clinton said:
Some have sought to justify this vicious behavior as a response to inflammatory material posted on the Internet. The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind.
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,497
3
0
When 3,000 Americans are killed on American soil on 9/11 no one could have seen it coming. But when 4 Americans are killed in an unstable foreign country on 9/11 it's a massive failure.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY