gungy,
If you want to know why they called it workplace violence, you need to ask the Army, not Obama. I'd like to know too because it clearly WAS an act of terrorism. And I hope the people suing the Army to get that classification changed prevail.
But you can't make up stuff where Bob Shieffer covered anything up because he's on record ripping the Army a new intestinal opening about how they handled the whole Hassan calamity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=95fuVf1fPTc
President Obama’s lie at the debate--that he made an early call the Benghazi attack was terror-- was petty and ludicrous.
It was petty because, as a semantic dispute, it grasped brief advantage that necessarily had to yield to inevitable fact-checking. It was ludicrous because, as a matter of history, it pretended two weeks of vehement, contradictory spin from the administration never happened.
When Mitt Romney challenged Obama on his failure to admit the Benghazi massacre was terrorism, the president threw down a startling gauntlet: He had indeed called the attack an act...
I quoted intelligence (CIA, etc.) here on TH earlier today from the 2 days before Susan Rice made her ill-advised round of interviews on the 9/17/12 Sunday news shows. That intel said exactly what she said.
I learned many decades ago that when "everybody" says something, it's a good time to say "Whoa, hoss." I opposed the Iraq War from the day it was first mentioned, despite what "everybody" (Dem and Rep) were saying. I'm from the South and a student of history. I KNOW what mob insanity looks like. Kind of like what happened in Benghazi ...
On March 13, 2003, Richard Cheney said, "We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons."
On the basis of that kind of unsubstantiated baloney, we started a $trillion dollar war which killed over 100,000 people, including 4,486 of our own. I have yet to hear George W. Bush take responsibility for this astonishing blunder. Nor will I ever.
Anyone waiting for a President of either party to voluntarily accept responsibility for anything embarrassing or politically damaging is delusional. And, for that matter, how many ordinary citizens are any better?
If you've got something quoting BO or anyone at the White House calling it workplace violence, I'd like to see it. And if I do, I'll readily agree with your point.
My take is that the Army made that classification in order to avoid having to pay out a lot more money in damages. Hence the recently announced lawsuit to get the classification changed -- which I wholeheartedly support.
Insisting that people, whether friend or foe be quoted accurately and contextually is not "covering up for them".