1 - 10 Next
What was the motivation for the attack, and how much planning went into it? If a group of people show up and throw stones at an embassy, that's a "terrorist attack." There are people bringing up the use of mortars and rocket propelled grenades as if this indicates some long-term "plan." There might be something to that if it were not Libya we were talking about -- a place where a myriad of yahoos raided weapons caches after the U.S. went blundering in there, and who rove about looking for mischief on a daily basis.
This author lists the vote count in her article. "According to the report given the day after elections, Allen B. West garnered 52,625 votes in St.Lucie county and Patrick Murphy 65,896 votes." That's 118, 521 votes -- a little under 70% voter turnout.
I don't see an ounce of skepticism in the CNN report. There was an incident not too long ago where Iran shot and hit a U.S. drone bringing it down -- deep inside Iranian territory. The U.S. government and news agencies could hardly deny the U.S. provocation on that one, so the simply glossed over it.
Am I seriously supposed to believe the U.S. government and Obama administration officials regarding the location of this drone? Iran has every right to fire on unauthorized flights over its airspace. CNN, not to mention Townhall needs to decide if it wants to be an independent news source, or if it wants to act like PRAVDA.
In response to:

Why Did Mitt Romney Lose?

McBender Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 1:03 PM
Double down on what? The last two Republican presidents pursued entitlement expansion better than any democrat could. In the George W. Bush presidency, a stunningly anti-Conservative foreign policy was pursued. What doubling down are you talking about?
In response to:

Why Did Mitt Romney Lose?

McBender Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 1:00 PM
No, as the article properly states, people who are willing to vote for a Conservative candidate, decided not to vote. There was no increased turnout of the kinds of people you speak of.
In response to:

Why Did Mitt Romney Lose?

McBender Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 12:30 PM
I can't help but note a subtle variation of the "blame the electorate" meme here -- this group did not vote because they were fooled by Obama. They're dupes. The reason for this latest debacle is because of the Republican Party -- period. The heart and soul of Conservatism is libertariansim. Ronald Reagan. No Republican presidential nominee since Reagan believes this. Not one. There is no evidence the Republican Party believes it. You have a party that is off track and has been for some time. A Republican nominee has not broke 300 electoral votes since 1988 -- and the 1988 result was not due to the person running at the time, but to the man finishing his second term.
In response to:

Don't Blame Romney

McBender Wrote: Nov 08, 2012 2:44 AM
The heart and soul of Conservatism is libertariansim. Ronald Reagan. No Republican presidential nominee since Reagan believes this. Not one. There is no evidence the Republican Party believes it. You have a party that is off track and has been for some time. A Republican nominee has not broke 300 electoral votes since 1988 -- and the 1988 result was not due to the person running at the time, but to the man finishing his second term.
In response to:

They Didn’t Riot over This Video

McBender Wrote: Oct 21, 2012 11:43 PM
The Israeli video didn't have the Prophet in it Ken. And if there's one thing you ought to know about vast swaths of Islamic societies, it's that you can't predict what will set them off or when -- particularly in destabilized areas with no law and order. You don't know what happened here. Thanks to the Obama administration, Libya is a destabilized area with armed zealots roaming the streets looking for mischief. But since large swaths of the Republican Party, including the buffoon Romney, howled for U.S. intervention, nobody bothers to bring that up.
In response to:

A Libya Timeline Refresher

McBender Wrote: Oct 17, 2012 3:15 PM
It seems to me that Obama is responsible for lax security, lax intelligence, and for destabilizing Libya in the first place. If Republicans were able to deal with basic reality, they could make some legitimate criticisms here. Of course, since the current crop of Republicans have taken a perverse delight in destabilizing middle eastern countries in the name of democracy for the better part of the last decade, and since most of them howled for the Libyan intervention, they can't really bring up that third point.
1 - 10 Next