Thanks again for telling the truth about Obama, I really wish more would dare to
question him. I wa afraid that the liberal activists had almost shut
down the media (Read Crafting Gay Children" if you want to understand where
I'm coming from, and where the comment activists are coming from, and why
the big push for Obama).
To "Tolstoy" you missed the point. The issue is that before he
condemned the violence, he appologized for the the US having freedom of speech
where people can say stupid things. You are dismissing the fact that he
appoligized for the US being a free nation.To "Eric
Samuelsen" That is nothing like the Obama appology. Spin it however you
want, the fact remains that Obama appologized for the US having free speech.
Redshirt"I hereby condemn the person who dented the bumper on your car
in the parking lot yesterday. That was a rotten thing to do, and you were right
to be angry about it."That sound like an apology to you?
Because that's the gist of the embassy statement.
Here is what is funny about this:Obama gets pilloried for his
statements about his role in the death of bin Laden - "he's taking too
much credit" "he didn't do it" "it had nothing to do with
him" - even though he was involved and informed about what was going on,
gave the go ahead for the attack, watched the attack happen, etc., etc., etc.
How dare he claim he had anything to do with that!Then - the US
Embassy in Libya sends out a tweet about a movie clip, and it is Obama's
fault and he is directly responsible.Obama had nothing to do with
bin Laden, and everything to do with the Libyan tweet. Really? Talk about a
double standard and a total unwillingness to be reasonable.
Part of the "Obama is a Muslim, anti-American friend of terrorists"
nonsense was to make him essentially unelectable in 2012. The strategy was to
help whoever was nominated by the Republicans win the election. In addition to
the demonization of Obama came the voter suppression activities to reduce
posssible support by people who might generally vote for the president but would
have difficulty meeting the requirements for voting this election cycle. Republicans thought they had it in the bag. They worked hard and their
best minds developed a campaign that was supposed to make people prefer a turnip
to Barack Obama. Even his successes were turned against him in a Swiftboating
propaganda effort that would make Karl Rove proud. So, Mitt Romney became the
candidate and Republicans were counting the number of seats they were going to
win in the U.S. Senate. Tax cuts for wealthy donors were on track, and Obama
looked like he was going home to Chicago.But several things
happened. The dog whistles that brought froth to the mouths of the Republican
base were not well-received by independents. The extremely partisan noise
(exemplified by this letter) appears to have failed.
@redshirtI love the way you cherry pick the partial quote to misrepresent
what Obama said. he went on to condemn the violence and stated there is no
excuse for the violence we where seeing.
Many posts discuss truth and/or accuracy in the letter and posts to this
letter.Rules for letters to the Deseret News and posts do NOT
require truth and/or accuracy. Nowhere is this mentioned as a requirement for
publishing or posting. The most important quality required for letters and
posts is to be civil.
The disconnect the writer and his apologists have with reality is frightening.
Their disregard for the facts, the suspension of reasonable
discourse and the presumption that this President ,who relentlessly pursued Bin
Laden, would think of appeasement first rather than the lives of Americans
murdered is astounding. Mr. Romney's attempts to capitalize on
the tragic deaths of real Americans underscores he lack of compassion for their
families and his desperation to win at all costs.
BigRichSince President Obama never said "In the end, it was our fault
it happened", or anything like it, I'm not clear why that's what
you got from his comments. How about this: it was a confusing episode, and it
took a few days for the US intelligence community to put all the data together
and figure out exactly what happened. What's clear is that
"Obama's apology" had absolutely nothing to do with anything, since
it never happened. As for his foreign policy, it's been
spectacularly effective. We're out of Iraq. We will be out of Afghanistan.
The Arab Spring was a tremendous challenge, and he managed that crisis with
immense dexterity, at times providing what support we could, at times letting
events unfold. He's done exceptionally well.
I don't think that the libs who have commented here actually noticed
Obama's response to Libya.Here is part of the official response
by the Obama administration issued on September 12, 2012. "The
Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by
misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims — as we
condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions...we firmly reject the
actions by those who abuse the universal right of free speech to hurt the
religious beliefs of others." That sure sounds line an appology to me, and
probably to most people.Next we had Obama saying that we
shouldn't jump to conclusions before knowing the facts. But jumping to
conclusions is what gave us the "beer summit" because Obama jumped to
conclusions before getting the facts.Then, the President of Libya
stated that the attacks were terrorists, and not angry demonstrators. Afterall,
howmany people bring RPGs to demonstrations.Now, tell us liberals,
seeing the facts presented once again. Why do you accept Obama appologizing to
muslims after a group a terrorists attacked and killed an ambassador?
The only thing obvious in all this, is that Obama and his fellow apologists on
these boards have a real soft spot in their heart for muslim terrorists,
especially when you factor Israel in the equation. Homebrew still can't
catch up to the Obama talking points, I guess he is just to busy slobbering over
the guy! Most of the Obama team has been admitting all week and now all the team
is, that it was a terrorist attack, and not the youtube video. The naive,
foolish and inept diplomacy of this administration is scary!
Brad didn't give a number, but just how many Libyan dead from another
Reagan-style US bombing raid or two would it take to even up the score? How many
To say that the Libya and Egypt incidents were the result of the video is just
wrong and ignores the facts leading up to what happened. When people say Obama
apologized, that may be the wrong terminology. What I got from Obama is, "In the end, it was our fault it happened." This is such a naive
stance. He first refused to call it a terrorist attack when they had word 24
hours prior to the attack that organized plots against our embassies were
imminent. Days later, they decided they better backtrack and call it a
terrorist attack. This is a man who has no clue because he had no experience in
governing coming in, and has fallen woefully short as he goes out. Look beyond
the facade and specifically list the elements of his foreign policy. There are
One more pathetic example of successful conservative radio brainwashing.
@steve v warren there you go again, letting the facts get in the
way. How is Brad suppose to turn this tragedy into a campaign ad if you go off
talking about the facts?
How come the furor over "build it by yourself" does not include reading,
listening and interpetting?
Mr. Merritt's letter has three major flaws: 1. President Obama did not
apologize for the attacks. 2. The president does not "naively" blame the
attacks on the video. He has blamed terrorists for the attacks. 3. "A
meaningful response" is not to bomb Libya, as Reagan did, but to hunt down
the perpetrators, as Obama did with Bin Laden.Al Forsysth was right.
Romney's initial response was disgraceful. He seems inclined to shoot first
and aim later.
The only fact really obvious about the Libyan attack is that a large part of the
American population has given up thinking for themselves in favor of lies told
to them by politicians. The only real truth that we can be
reasonable sure of is that an attack did occur and the American Ambassador was
killed. All the speculations about the manner and motives of the attackers is
simply speculation. And are being used for political purposes. The
motivation of American business, conservatives, republicans and their main
voice, Fox News, is to take this nation to war. Not that they themselves want
to fight and die, they expect the sons and daughters of the general public to do
their dirty work. Secondary to their main goal is the gaining more
complete over the American government. Reducing control of their activities and
the promotion of world conquest is expected to give them the power to rob the
world of it’s wealth. If Romney wins and the Tea Party
takes over our government, we will go to war.
The video is exactly why they attacked. Its whats stirring unrest in the region.
Turn off fox news, and quit listening tio Hate radio,, It makes your brain
mushy. What do you want. To be able to engage in 2 wars at one time like Mitt
Romney states. To Bomb Bomb Bomb, Bomb Bomb Iran,, like mcCain states. The 2
wars we are getting out of, just cost us 3 trillion dollars. Who's tab did
that go on Bush's??? No it went on Obama's tab. You conservatives are
real funny. You can have your own opinion,, But you cant have your own facts.
So are you suggesting we launch attacks in Egypt and Libya? I
thought repubs wanted to cut the deficit? Starting 2 more wars isn't going
to cut the deficit. Quite the opposite actually. Using your logic,
wouldn't it just be easier to declare war on the entire Middle-East?
disgraceful is people like mitt and brad trying to turn this tragedy into some
type of political football with their bold face lies.
Disgraceful? Only if you consider uninformed, conflicting, politically motivated
and inadequate to be disgraceful.
What a petty inaccurate letter."In 1986, President Ronald Reagan
bombed Libya for their role in the attack on a Berlin discotheque."Reagan did a lot of dumb things, thanks for pointing out another.Most of what you sight as fact is nothing but speculation by people with no
more information than you passing around lies that entertain the right
wing's "the muslims a coming to get you." fear mongering.
Sorry, Brad -- the President apologized for NOTHING, and soundly condemned the
attacks from the start. What is disgraceful is Romney's bald-faced lies
about what the President said and did.
Once and for all, Obama did not apologize after the attack. Can't the right
wing have any hint of honesty?
"Obama's response was to condemn the attack and once again
apologize."That's an outright, bald-faced lie. President Obama did indeed condemn the attack, but he issued no apology.Mr. Merritt, and other conservatives who believe this lie, I challenge
you to cite the prsident's exact words and the date you think they were