How Can Anyone Continue to Support Obama?

Mark Tapson, a Hollywood-based writer and screenwriter, is a Shillman Journalism Fellow at the David Horowitz Freedom Center. He focuses on the politics of popular culture.


President Obama Makes Statement On The SequestrationThe left’s kneejerk propensity for blaming George W. Bush for every disaster, from the Lincoln assassination to a bad hair day, has long served as comedy fodder among conservatives. But the serious psychological disorder known as BDS – Bush Derangement Syndrome – is no joke among President Obama’s faithful, who six years later still cling to the notion that Bush is the reason Obama hasn’t yet shown us the promised land and healed the planet as he promised in his 2008 nomination speech.

Last Tuesday, a bipartisan poll found that Obama’s approval rating has hit an all-time (for him) low of 40%, with his handling of foreign policy at a dismal 36%. And yet, for those of us who consider his presidency to be an unmitigated disaster, it’s difficult to comprehend why his approval rating at this point isn’t at zero. In all seriousness, how is it possible that 40% of Americans can still be giving him a thumbs-up? Obviously there is a variety of explanations: low-information voters, willful blindness, progressive brainwashing, or just plain stubbornness among those who can’t admit that their Messiah is a false prophet. And of course there are those radicals who are simply in ideological lockstep with his agenda. But BDS threads throughout it all; “it’s Bush’s fault” remains an unassailable article of progressive faith – and a very convenient excuse.

In a Fox News segment recently on Obama’s leadership, pollster Frank Luntz spoke with about thirty average citizens, half of whom had been Obama voters, about the President’s sagging numbers in terms of favorability and job approval. The bloom was off the rose for some of the disillusioned participants who had previously supported him, but others among the studio audience still stood by their man. A hardcore supporter with the nametag “Shelton” said he believes Obama “is doing an excellent job, considering the circumstances in which he took the office, and all the things piled on his desk.” In other words, as Shelton put it later, “he’s cleaning up George Bush’s mess.”

Even conceding that GWB did leave behind some serious fires to put out, it’s unclear how creating entirely new conflagrations – encouraging a southern border invasion, imposing upon us a health care leviathan, directly contributing to the “Arab Spring” chaos, alienating our allies and empowering our enemies, exacerbating race relations, dismantling our military, turning the IRS into a political weapon, to name some (but by no means all) – can be considered “cleaning up.” Almost six years into the Obama era, he hasn’t even begun to fix “Bush’s mess” – if anything, he has exacerbated it by overloading our national debt and expanding the NSA surveillance state. Obama isn’t cleaning up the Bush legacy – he is burdening us with his own.

Shelton disagreed: “He’s keeping the country out of war, he’s keeping the economy stable –” At that point Luntz interrupted him to turn to another participant who had been shaking his head in disagreement. When that man pressed him to name even one Obama accomplishment, Shelton again responded, “He’s keeping us out of war! Isn’t that enough?” Well, no, especially considering that he hasn’t done even that. Obama didn’t end the war in Iraq – the troop drawdown was scheduled under Bush, although Obama took credit for ending it until he began to be blamed for leaving a vacuum there for ISIS to fill. And Obama increased the number of our troops in Afghanistan where they are still dying (including a brigadier general, the highest ranking officer to die there); as of last year, we still have nearly twice as many there as when he took office. This is to say nothing of the future wars Obama is courting because he has demonstrated to the world that America under him is weak. This has not gone unnoticed by an empowered, resurgent Russia, China, Iran, and our non-state Islamic enemies. But in Shelton’s mind, Obama ended Bush’s illegal wars and so now “war is over,” as John Lennon sang.

Then a woman in the group urged, “Let’s bring back George Bush. Let’s have a great leader.” The suggestion was like a bomb going off in the studio. “It’s George Bush’s fault!” shouted one man. Shelton jumped in with, “George Bush lied about the Iraq War. He lied, and Barack Obama is getting us out of a mess!” This was the same man who moments before had said that Obama hadn’t lied about Obamacare or Benghazi.

Another woman agreed with Shelton, claiming that “[Obama] can’t clean this up in 10 years, 12 years, 14 years. This takes time. He’s just prepping the next President.” One man who didn’t vote for Obama pointed out, however, that “when Reagan took over from Carter it took him three years, but he solved it. When Clinton took over, he took two years, but he solved it.”The Obama fans didn’t respond – evidently, rather than expect their man to solve problems, they just plan to keep blaming Bush indefinitely, or at least for the next 14 years.

In closing the segment, Luntz asked why we stop being civil with each other when Bush’s name comes up, and one gentleman complained that it’s because the left “keeps going back to Bush” instead of moving forward and taking responsibility for the current state of affairs. But of course that’s the whole point: without clinging to their delusional rationalization about Bush, how else could so many Americans convince themselves that nothing in the current state of affairs can possibly be Obama’s fault?

  • JJ

    Bush Derangement Syndrome only scratches the surface of a much deeper problem with Obama’s supporters and our country. A Czech editorialist summed it up best:

    “. . .Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools such as those who made him their President.”

    • sundance69

      Truer words were never spoken……..

    • fistdeyuma

      Exactly. It is why I’ve given up on hope for America. I understand why Obama was elected. I cannot comprehend why he was reelected. There is no logical reason to vote for Obama.

      • carpe diem 36

        nor was there.

      • EdWatts

        Yup. America has become too evil and stupid to be allowed to continue.

    • Infidel4Ever

      Well said, It’s why I’m not optimistic about America’s future. If all the fools who voted for Obama woke up the country might have a chance, but I see no sign of it. Like Ron White said: “You can’t fix stupid. Stupid is forever.”

  • ew_3

    Not complicated….

    Who believed OJ was innocent ?

    • sundance69

      You better not go there you racist.

    • Michael Garfinkel

      Actually, You’re on to something, which is why you’re being called names so quickly.

      While blacks are over-represented in the prisons and the welfare roles by a factor of five, they continue to support Obama in percentages above 90%.

      Polls that were limited to Whites, Asians and Hispanics would show Obama’s overall approval rating in the low to mid-thirties.

      Incidentally, no one, Black or white, as the saying goes, believed OJ was innocent – and that most certainly included the acquittal jury.

      You can see the seeds of the present disgrace in that verdict, and the celebrations in the black neighborhoods when the verdict was announced.

      • Michael Garfinkel

        Resentment often trumps decency, in the Democrat base, and in Obama himself.

      • EdWatts

        I saw an interview with one jury member, and she said, “Oh, I think he did it, all right…but I had ‘reasonable doubt’!”

        HUH?

        • Michael Garfinkel

          And she votes!

          • EdWatts

            Yup. And, knowing what I know, I’ll bet you that I could take a blank ballot and fill it out to match hers with greater than ninety percent accuracy.

          • Michael Garfinkel

            More like 94%.

            The Black vote went against Romney 94-6.

            In 59 precincts in Philadelphia and 9 in Cleveland – heavily black precincts, Romney received ZERO votes.

            What a mockery this made of the hard-won gains to extend the voting franchise to minorities.

            And the costs to the country are incalculable – as we are seeing already.

    • Terry Smith

      Perfect analogy.

  • swemson

    If I may borrow a bit from H.L. Mencken:

    “Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American Public”

    But let’s not forget the “X Factor” of election fraud. I honestly believe it plays a much bigger role in the final vote count than even the Fox pundits give it credit for… There were 5 key states in 2012, that I believe Romney actually won but for Democratic vote fraud. If the vote had been counted honestly, Obama would already be gone.

    fs

    • Peter McDougald

      This is the source of BDS, the left wing believe that Bush ‘stole’ the election from the idiot Al Gore.

      • Evermyrtle

        The left does not believe that, they know exactly what happened, They caused it to happen so why would they think otherwise. They are really simple liars, they do their dirt and then blame someone else, that is the oldest game in the book. They are without a clue that America’s enemies know how much to trust them, when the get control and what to do about it.

        When the Muslim Islamist take over, they will get rid of our enemies, too because they will not want people with so little understanding working for them, those who have no clues that they, too are living on borrowed time.

    • http://www.stubbornthings.org NAHALKIDES

      Voter fraud is a problem, and the Dems might steal the 2016 Presidential race if it’s close. But the biggest advantage the Dems have is their ability to buy votes with other people’s money. As long as they can engage in legalized bribery (“Vote Democratic and we’ll give you lots of free stuff!”) they will have a terrific advantage over Republicans. In the long run, we need to take that away from them, which basically means dismantling the federal welfare state.

      • autofixer

        The election WILL be close, every future election will be close…at least until the newly arrived democrats are registered to vote & then we will have the much coveted One Party State. Forward Comrade!

        • carpe diem 36

          no need to wait for that, just look at what our schools and universities are producing, and you know the future of this country is sealed. Those kids are never taught anything they are simply indoctrinated, they are not allowed to hear an opposing opinion, the universities do not allow right wing professors to teach or to speak to their students and you have a one party system at our expense.

        • EdWatts

          If voting could really change things, they wouldn’t let us do it.

      • knowshistory

        sorry. that train has already left the station. the vote should have been separated from the dole when it was first established, or is should never have been established. now that those getting an unearned check outnumber those who don’t, the issue is settled. welfare will get bigger and bigger, and the welfare lobby will get stronger and stronger, until our government crashes. we do not know the when where and how of our government’s demise, but we do know the why, and who is responsible: democratic party opportunists, republican party cowards, and an amoral population.

      • Debbie G

        And don’t forget the Republicans who bought Democratic votes in Mississippi.

        • http://www.stubbornthings.org NAHALKIDES

          If you’re referring to the Establishment supporters of Thad Cochran, they did less buying than securing by misrepresentation of the other side as racist. Cochran himself of course support massive social spending, making him a vote-buyer.

    • Americana

      No, no one ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of any voter, anywhere. This is not just an issue in the U.S. It’s international.

      Why is it the true explanations for Benghazi continue to be ignored in order to promote the fiction that the Obama administration insisted on doing nothing? The Benghazi debacle was the result of the American Rapid Deployment Forces disposition around the region. This Rapid Response philosophy had been the brainchild of Sec. of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Of course, when it was instituted the new Rapid Response philosophy didn’t have a clue just how widespread and how competent small, functional al Qaeda cells would be. (The simple fact is there was not sufficient time for U.S. Rapid Response Forces to get to Benghazi before the first Americans died. Ambassador Stevens and Information Officer Smith died within an hour and a half of the onslaught.)

      Why is it the true explanations behind the U.S. troop withdrawal in Iraq continue to be ignored in order to promote the fiction that Pres. Obama should have been able to persuade PM Nouri al-Maliki that U.S. forces had to remain in Iraq? (Pres. Bush signed the status of forces withdrawal agreement years before the payment due date in 2011. Why did Pres. Bush sign that agreement? Because he didn’t want U.S. soldiers liable to face Iraqi (potentially sharia) justice.)

      As for voter fraud, that’s never been proven to exist on the scale of the claims made by Republicans. The claims there are illegal aliens voting all over the darn place in order to influence American political power is NONSENSICAL. Illegals would risk everything by trying to fool the polling personnel, besides they have other means of being politically effective that doesn’t risk them being active voters.

      • Drakken

        You still buy the Obummer narrative and try to sell it as gospel. There was more than sufficient time to send an RR force to the area, you never ever leave men behind in a combat zone, EVER, and to blame it on Rumsfeld is unconscionable and is complete leftist propaganda to save your boys azz. Your a die hard leftist socialist that will excuse everything and anything from this administration. You socialist won’t be happy until everyone is equally miserable in a 3rd world cesspool.

        • Americana

          Drakken, I’ve about had it w/you and your “die-hard socialist” malarkey. If you can prove American forces could have got to Benghazi in time to save those men, be my guest. No one is falsifying flight manifests for Special Forces groups to make it appear they couldn’t have got there. But if Ambassador Stevens and Information Officer Smith were dead within the first hour and a half of fighting, no American forces I know of were close enough to get there in time.

          Every single Special Forces group that has said they could get there in time has been found to be unrealistic about their flight time and prep schedule. It was a tragedy that occurred because of numerous factors, some within the sphere of the Diplomatic Corps. and some within the sphere of the U.S. armed forces. Even within the U.S. Congress’ appropriation system. The fact the U.S. command for the region rearranged the Rapid Response Forces and put one RRF on each American ship that has a Marine Expeditionary Unit as well as posted a RRF at Sigonella Air Base in Italy, tells me that the U.S. Central Command recognized holes in coverage. This human won’t be happy until you get realistic.

          • swemson

            You just don’t get it do you?

            The point is he didn’t even try.

            They didn’t know what the end result would be when they first heard the consulate in Benghazi was under attack…

            I heard a great speech by Bill Whittle in which he said that the first thing he would have done upon hearing of the attack, is order the Chief of Naval Operations, to immediately send in the choppers from the rapid response facility we keep in Italy, and until they got there, to order F18′s from the nearest carrier battle group (20 minutes away) to start flying over the consulate at supersonic speeds at only 300 ft above the ground to let everyone there know that we were on our way to get our people, and if the sonic booms broke every window in Benghazi, they could bill us for it.

            Sadly, in this case we would still have been too late, but the message we would have sent to the terrorists, about the consequences of attacking our people ANYWHERE in the world, would have been well worth it.

            Instead Obama sent just the opposite message, and you can be sure that events like this will happen more frequently in the future.

            fs

          • Americana

            Oh, I more than “get it.” Do you know how STUPID that whole F-18 scenario is? A sonic boom or a series of sonic booms is not going to delay anyone who’s executing an urban attack like Benghazi unless bombs are dropped. Two passes without dropping bombs and those jihadis would have known they could attack w/impunity. We cannot drop bombs just because we want to in that situation. We especially don’t want to drop bombs all over the place when we know for a fact we have many CIA operatives on the ground OUTSIDE the consular compound. Why kill other Americans, CIA officers, while trying to prevent the jihadis getting access to the compound if you know there’s a safe room for the American ambassador and the man w/him, Information Officer Sean Smith?

          • swemson

            Who said anything about dropping bombs…?

            Have you ever witnessed a fighter jet making a low altitude supersonic pass…. It can scare the crap out of anyone… even when you know it’s coming.

            It certainly would have scared the crap out of most of those terrorists, and let all of them know we were on our way.

            Even if it turned out to be only a gesture…. it still would have been worth doing…

            fs

          • Americana

            Yes, I used to vacation quite near two different East Coast air force bases in Massachusetts. The sonic boom might scare you but once you know they’re bluffing, it’s not going to stop anyone doing anything. it might throw off your aim once in a while but stop an attack FOR HOURS until help arrived? NO WAY.

          • Drakken

            You have no idea how a targeting computer works do you? Your leftist bullsh*t isn’t going to wash anymore sunshine so give it a rest. Your ignorance is a sight to watch.

          • Americana

            Someone has to be in position to use a targeting laser, for those targeted bombs Drakken. Also, dropping laser-targeted bombs when you’ve got a large number of CIA personnel on the streets around the consular compound is kind of nonsensical. Your general BS isn’t flying very well either. In fact, a few times now you’ve smacked head first into your own commentary not being truthful enough to pass muster.

          • Americana

            http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/africa/libya-benghazi-timeline/

            (CNN) — The Pentagon released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, highlighting when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and senior commanders were informed of the attack and when decisions were made to move forces to assist. The release comes as the Obama administration is facing increasing questions over its response to the attack.

            September 11 (Events are listed using the time in Benghazi)

            9:42 p.m. — Armed men begin their assault on the U.S. Consulate.

            9:59 p.m. — A surveillance drone is directed to fly over the U.S. compound, but it is unarmed.

            10:32 p.m. — The Office of the Secretary Defense and the Joint Staff are notified of the attack by the National Military Command Center at the Pentagon. “The information is quickly passed to Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey.”

            11 p.m. — Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey meet with President Obama at the White House where they discuss the unfolding situation and how to respond. The meeting had been previously scheduled.

            11:10 p.m. — The surveillance drone arrives over the Benghazi facility.

            11:30 p.m. — All surviving U.S. personnel are evacuated from the consulate. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and State Department computer expert Sean Smith were killed in the initial assault.
            _____________________________________________________

            September 12

            Midnight to 2 a.m. — Panetta and other senior leaders discuss possible options for further violence if it were to break out. Panetta gives verbal orders for Marine anti-terrorist teams from Rota, Spain, to prepare to deploy to Tripoli and Benghazi. Panetta also orders a special operations force team training in Croatia and an additional special operations force team in the United States to prepare to deploy to a staging base in southern Italy.

            1:30 a.m. — A six-man security team from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli arrives in Benghazi.

            2:39 a.m. to 2:53 a.m. — The National Military Command Center gives formal authorization for the deployment of the two special operations force teams from Croatia and the United States.

            5:15 a.m. — Attackers launch assault on a second U.S. facility in Benghazi. Two former U.S. Navy SEALs acting as security contractors are killed. They are identified as Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

            6:05 a.m. — A C-17 aircraft in Germany is told to prepare to deploy to Libya to evacuate the consulate personnel.

            7:40 a.m. — The first wave of Americans are evacuated to Tripoli via airplane.

            10 a.m. — A second group, including those killed in the attack, are flown to Tripoli.

            2:15 p.m. — The C-17 departs from Germany for the flight to Tripoli.

            7:17 p.m. — The C-17 leaves Tripoli with the American consulate personnel and the bodies of Stevens, Smith, Woods and Doherty.

            7:57 p.m. — The U.S. special operations force team based in Croatia arrives at a staging base in Italy.

            8:56 p.m. — One of the Marine anti-terrorist teams from Spain arrives in Tripoli.

            9:28 p.m. — The U.S.-based special operations force team arrives at its staging base in Italy.

          • reader

            “Every single Special Forces group that has said they could get there in time has been found to be unrealistic about their flight time and prep schedule.”

            …and this valuable insight information as usual comes to us from your fellow trolls of huff-po, I assume?

          • Americana

            Let’s see, Drakken produced the latest and greatest story where a SEAL claimed they could have gotten there in time to save Ambassador Stevens and their timeframe was shown to be off by about 2-3 hours. Go ahead, the challenge is out there for anyone to prove that a unit could have gotten there within an hour and a half. That’s probably not quite the timeframe that would have been needed since the SEALs would have had to drop elsewhere and fight their way to the consular compound… But the challenge is open to anyone, it’s not just open to our congressmen.

          • reader

            Oh, what a settled and graceful – not really – bait and switch. I addressed YOUR contention about the time being unrealistic. So, YOU have the burden of showing the source of this “finding”.

          • Americana

            You didn’t address the contention about the time being unrealistic in any way. Talk about BAIT and SWITCH, your post is laughably cocky. You want to prove ANY American forces could have got to Benghazi in time to save Ambassdor Stevens and Information Officer Sean Smith then go ahead and do so.

            Produce the name of the American military outfit and a timeline that would have got American forces there on the ground and fighting their way through the jihadi forces in time to save those Americans. You’ve got less than an hour and a half from the time the assault first started to the first deaths.

          • reader

            “You’ve got less than an hour and a half from the time the assault first started to the first deaths.”

            Here’s another one. I assume, this timeline also comes from your fellow trolls of huff-po – given the fact that you keep leaving your highly informed sources off.

          • Americana

            In case you pretend to miss this post, here it is again:

            Are you just incapable of reading English? What is so mysterious about WHERE this timeline comes from? How much PLAINER can English get than the following:

            (CNN) — **The PENTAGON** released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault…

            That states right there in the first sentence that CNN is publishing a timeline provided by the PENTAGON. As far as I know, the Pentagon **is NOT a subsidiary** of either the Huffington Post or CNN.

          • Drakken

            If your going to try to debunk me dumbazz, at least get your goddamn nomenclature fu**ing right. I said a Maine FAST Team, not a Seal unit moron. Your little time line is missing lots of information, but hey, keep on using those leftarded morons as your basis to sell the usual leftist narrative and support your boy Obummer.

          • Americana

            Doesn’t matter what the unit was, Drakken. There wasn’t time to get them there. Debunking you? No, the Pentagon is debunking you, here:

            http://www.cnn.com/2012/11/09/world/africa/libya-benghazi-timeline/

            (CNN) — The Pentagon released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault on the U.S. Consulate in Benghazi, Libya, highlighting when Defense Secretary Leon Panetta and senior commanders were informed of the attack and when decisions were made to move forces to assist. The release comes as the Obama administration is facing increasing questions over its response to the attack.

            September 11 (Events are listed using the time in Benghazi)

            9:42 p.m. — Armed men begin their assault on the U.S. Consulate.

            9:59 p.m. — A surveillance drone is directed to fly over the U.S. compound, but it is unarmed.

            10:32 p.m. — The Office of the Secretary Defense and the Joint Staff are notified of the attack by the National Military Command Center at the Pentagon. “The information is quickly passed to Secretary Panetta and General Dempsey.”

            11 p.m. — Panetta and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey meet with President Obama at the White House where they discuss the unfolding situation and how to respond. The meeting had been previously scheduled.

            11:10 p.m. — The surveillance drone arrives over the Benghazi facility.

            11:30 p.m. — All surviving U.S. personnel are evacuated from the consulate. U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens and State Department computer expert Sean Smith were killed in the initial assault.
            _____________________________________________________

            September 12

            Midnight to 2 a.m. — Panetta and other senior leaders discuss possible options for further violence if it were to break out. Panetta gives verbal orders for Marine anti-terrorist teams from Rota, Spain, to prepare to deploy to Tripoli and Benghazi. Panetta also orders a special operations force team training in Croatia and an additional special operations force team in the United States to prepare to deploy to a staging base in southern Italy.

            1:30 a.m. — A six-man security team from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli arrives in Benghazi.

            2:39 a.m. to 2:53 a.m. — The National Military Command Center gives formal authorization for the deployment of the two special operations force teams from Croatia and the United States.

            5:15 a.m. — Attackers launch assault on a second U.S. facility in Benghazi. Two former U.S. Navy SEALs acting as security contractors are killed. They are identified as Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

            6:05 a.m. — A C-17 aircraft in Germany is told to prepare to deploy to Libya to evacuate the consulate personnel.

            7:40 a.m. — The first wave of Americans are evacuated to Tripoli via airplane.

            10 a.m. — A second group, including those killed in the attack, are flown to Tripoli.

            2:15 p.m. — The C-17 departs from Germany for the flight to Tripoli.

            7:17 p.m. — The C-17 leaves Tripoli with the American consulate personnel and the bodies of Stevens, Smith, Woods and Doherty.

            7:57 p.m. — The U.S. special operations force team based in Croatia arrives at a staging base in Italy.

            8:56 p.m. — One of the Marine anti-terrorist teams from Spain arrives in Tripoli.

            9:28 p.m. — The U.S.-based special operations force team arrives at its staging base in Italy.

          • reader

            And – interestingly enough – the 11:30PM line about U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens killed during the initial assault is conspicuously absent from the initial time-line:

            http://www.factcheck.org/2012/10/benghazi-timeline/

            Trolls rewriting history, eh.

          • Americana

            You’ll have to contact the PENTAGON and the FACTCHECK organization about why the Pentagon timeline **has** the 11:30 timeline entry about the deaths of Ambassador Stevens and IO Smith and the Factcheck.org doesn’t. I’m not sure WHY ON EARTH you’d claim the FactCheck.org timeline is the “initial timeline.” Better explain that reasoning of yours.

            I didn’t REVISE the Pentagon timeline if that’s what you’re suggesting w/your “troll revising history” remark. If you check the ORIGINAL link I provided, you’ll find the timeline is identical to what I posted here.

            So, I’m not sure what your point is, but it’s up to you to confirm what the issues are between the two timelines if there are any conflicting times or information. CNN posted the official PENTAGON TIMELINE and that’s what I provided verbatim.

          • reader

            “I’m not sure WHY ON EARTH you’d claim theFactCheck.org timeline is the “initial timeline.”

            Because it is. Why would you claim that CNN time-line is the initial time-line and that it is the official time-line? Did CNN report truth about, say the proverbial “Jenin massacre”? No, they reported an unmitigated lie.

          • reader

            “Why would you claim that CNN time-line is the initial time-line and that it is the official time-line?” meant to write

            Why would you claim that CNN time-line is the initial time-line and that it is the official Pentagon time-line?

          • Americana

            reader, FYI.

            What is so mysterious about WHERE this timeline comes from? How much PLAINER can English get than the following:

            (CNN) — **The PENTAGON** released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault…

            That states right there in the first sentence that CNN is publishing a timeline provided by the PENTAGON. As far as I know, the Pentagon **is NOT a subsidiary** of either the Huffington Post or CNN.

          • Pete

            One of the security personnel at the annex lit up a jihadi position with a laser designator. He was either bluffing or he expected help form above from a drone and officials made the decision to deny it to the people in th compound.

            And here is your scuzzy self carrying water for The Regime.

          • Americana

            The drone that was sent was an UNARMED DRONE. There are far more unarmed surveillance drones that are being used in the Middle East than there are ARMED drones. The military contractor who used the targeting laser could have been doing a LOT of different things in an attempt to help the CIA ground forces outside the Benghazi consulate. He could have been hoping the CIA guys had mortars or shoulder-mounted missiles or that they’d see the laser painting and know where to direct their attack. We’ll never know.

            I don’t carry water for anybody.

          • Pete

            Sicily is an hour or 2 away. It was close enough to provide support for an 8 hour siege.

          • Americana

            Of course, read the full story:
            _____________________________________________________

            http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/04/world/africa/benghazi-attack-raises-doubts-about-us-abilities-in-region.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

            Acting on Mr. Obama’s order, the staff of the Joint Chiefs presented the options. Around 6:30 p.m., oral instructions were given for the units to get ready to deploy and formal deployment orders were issued after 8:30 p.m. The early reports in Washington noted that Ambassador Stevens was missing, and a major worry was that a hostage-rescue mission might be needed.

            The Pentagon sent the Delta Force commandos to the Sigonella base in Sicily, to put them in position to deploy to Libya. Two 50-strong platoons of specially trained Marines, from Rota, Spain, were ordered to get ready to deploy, too.

            Another option approved was to send the European Command’s quick-reaction force, which consists of about four dozen Special Forces soldiers and other specialists. But it was in the middle of a mission in Croatia. Elements of the team began leaving for Sigonella by 9 p.m., and the unit completed its deployment to Sicily shortly after noon the next day, a Pentagon official said. By then the 30 or so surviving Americans, and the bodies of their four colleagues, were in Tripoli.

            With the region still in turmoil, the European Command’s quick-reaction team was sent on to Tunis. One of the Marine platoons was sent to Tripoli to protect the United States Embassy there. The Delta Force commandos, having arrived too late to help, flew back home, Pentagon officials said.

            Now, the administration has quietly begun a major interdepartmental review of security requirements in North Africa and the Middle East, said officials, who like others spoke on the condition of anonymity because of continuing investigations.

            Independent military experts say that the fledgling Africa Command’s capabilities need to be strengthened, particularly in light of the array of new threats, from a Qaeda franchise that has seized control of northern Mali to Islamist groups gaining strength in nations like Libya and Tunisia.

            “There will have to be a reassessment of the priorities and resources for Africom, given the responsibilities it has in one of the most volatile regions of the world,” said Jack Keane, the retired general who served as the Army vice chief of staff. “And certainly a quick response force, with air and ground capabilities, has to be an important part of those resources.”

          • reader

            “About three hours after the American diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, came under attack, the Pentagon issued an urgent call for an array of quick-reaction forces”

            That’s the opening quote from this NYT article. If it was not such an outrage , it would be laughable. Three hours? Who were they looking for for three hours exactly?

          • Americana

            The Special Forces team didn’t arrive at the Sicily base until after the first attack had been successful in overrunning the American consular compound:

            http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/12/fog-of-war-in-benghazi-hampered-military-response.html

            WASHINGTON — The military might have been able to prevent two of the four U.S. deaths in Benghazi if commanders had known more about the intensity of the sporadic gunfire directed at the CIA installation where Americans had taken refuge and had pressed to get a rescue team there faster, according to senior military leaders.

            In closed-door testimony to Congress earlier this year, top military officers said that after the first attack on the main U.S. diplomatic outpost on Sept. 11, 2012, they thought the fighting had subsided and the Americans who had fled to the CIA base about a mile away were safe. In fact, they were facing intermittent small-arms fire and rocket-propelled grenades around midnight and had returned fire. Then the attackers dispersed.

            Hours later, at first light, an 11-minute mortar and rocket-propelled grenade attack slammed into the CIA annex, killing security contractors Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

            In hindsight, retired Gen. Carter Ham, then head of the U.S. military command in Africa, said he would have pressed Libyan contacts in the defense ministry and other officials to help speed up the evacuation of Americans from Benghazi.

            Also, a special operations team that had been dispatched from Croatia to Sicily after the first attack might have made it to Benghazi, if a host of variables were ideal – a quick departure, wind direction and speed, and an unobstructed runway to land a U.S. aircraft.

            Ham said “in a perfect world, with no other disruptions or distractions,” it could have happened.

            As it turned out, a six-man security team, including Special Forces personnel that arrived at Benghazi airport at 1:30 a.m., was held up there for hours by Libyan militia.

            “In my view, that time delay, that inability of the team to get off of the Benghazi airport and get to the annex and back I think allowed sufficient time for the second attack to be organized and conducted,” said Ham, who was in Washington at the time of the attacks.

          • Pete

            “As it turned out, a six-man security team, including Special Forces personnel that arrived at Benghazi airport at 1:30 a.m., was held up there for hours by Libyan militia.”

            And Hillary, Obama or Biden can’t work the phones.

            Obama did remind us he had a pen and a phone. I guess he can’t do international calls.

            Also there is this little thing called the 6th fleet. You might want to brush up on it.

            They sent a reaction team. They could have sent the marines in Sicily instead of spec ops. They were much closer.

            Tell me, could the Libyans have held up the Air Force or Navy if they had flown planes or drones to Ben Ghazi?

          • Pete

            Yes we know. It is okay American. You think that spec ops is the only way to respond to danger. Screw the Air force, Screw the Navy and Screw the Marines

          • Americana

            Even more interesting is that the U.S. armed forces didn’t know there was a CIA safe house annex and didn’t know that a second firefight would erupt there. Also the CIA officers at the CIA annex thought they could withstand anything if the CIA safe house were attacked:
            _____________________________________________________

            http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/07/12/fog-of-war-in-benghazi-hampered-military-response.html

            In a very short time, many in the military, including Ham, would then learn about the CIA annex. In his testimony, Ham said he was certain that someone in his command knew of the existence of the facilities in Benghazi, but he acknowledged that the crisis was “not the ideal time to become aware of such facilities.”

            Throughout the night, the information relayed to military officers in Tripoli, up the chain of command to AFRICOM headquarters in Stuttgart, Germany, and the Pentagon in Washington was incomplete and often contradictory. And that complicated efforts to mobilize personnel and aircraft to get Americans out of Libya.

            “Omniscience is for God only,” said a member of the U.S. Army who was operations director for the Special Operations Command Africa, and whose name was omitted from the testimony.

            After the first attack, Ham and other military leaders were focused on a potential hostage situation, unaware that Stevens was already dead from smoke inhalation. They were under the impression that the Americans at the annex were safe, and none of the information they received suggested otherwise.

            Retired Vice Adm. Charles “Joe” Leidig Jr., who was Ham’s deputy, said the Americans weren’t requesting military reinforcements to respond to the sporadic gunfire, but rather were seeking a plane to get out.

            “Once that indirect fire was over, they said `we’re going to get out of this annex, we’re going to get to the Benghazi airfield,’ and now what they wanted was lift capability at Benghazi airfield,” Leidig said.

            A U.S. defense attache in Tripoli, who was relaying information up the chain of command that night, said he didn’t learn of the nighttime gunfire until a day or two later.

            Americans at the CIA base were confident they could deal with the gunfire. The intelligence official who was the chief of base told the Senate Intelligence Committee in December 2012 that “until the mortar attack, we were pretty comfortable that we could stave off any type of ground assault on the annex.”

          • Pete

            Why would the CIA tell them if they were running guns to Syrian Rebels?

          • Pete

            You carry all day long.

          • reader

            First of all, this is the CNN version of the release. Secondly, its not the initial, but edited release. Thirdly, this release logically contradicts Clinton’s statement made after 10 PM of the night of the assault – you know, the statement that does not mention the US Ambassador at all. In other words, the CNN time-line does not add up. It’s bogus. What a shock! It NEVER happened to CNN reporting before. Right.

          • Americana

            CNN would never “edit” an official Pentagon timeline that was provided to CNN unless they knew there were facts that didn’t add up. If that were the case, CNN would end up making a big stinking mention of the fact the times and events were suspect.

          • reader

            “CNN would end up making a big stinking mention of the fact the times and events were suspect.”

            Really? CNN flat out lied on numerous occasions. But we don’t have to assume that the Pentagon time line was not edited either. That’s what swearing under oath before the Grand Jury is for. It got slick willy impeached and disbarred. Ahhh

          • Americana

            Pres. Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about having sexual relations of various kinds as President. Given the evasiveness you display, somehow I doubt you’d be very upfront about your own White House sexual escapades and peckerdilloes (sic, intentionally) since you can’t even stick to facts on Benghazi.

          • reader

            Clinton was impeached for obstruction of justice. He was also disbarred for being in contempt of Arkansas court – i.e., lying under oath. He did a lot of lying otherwise too, of course, and Obama clearly beat him at lying – hands down. But putting people under oath is essential for either eliciting the truth out of them or punishing them for lying. That’s what the huff po trolls like you are fighting against. Not too complicated.

          • Americana

            What are the differences between the word “initial” and the word “official?”

            1ini·tial adjective i-ˈni-shəl

            : occurring at the beginning of something

            Full Definition of INITIAL

            1 of or relating to the beginning : incipient

            2: placed at the beginning : first

            — ini·tial·ly adverb

            — ini·tial·ness noun

            2 official adjective

            : of or relating to the job or work of someone in a position of authority

            —used to describe something that is said in a public way by someone in a position of authority

            —used to describe something that is done in a public and often formal way

            Full Definition of OFFICIAL

            1: of or relating to an office, position, or trust

            2: holding an office

            3 a : authoritative, authorized

          • IslamDownpressesHumanity

            Trivial objection noted.

          • reader

            Here’s more on rewriting history: at 10:30PM of the same night Clinton made the statement confirming just ONE dead – presumably Smith. The links to this statement initially provided by the State Department and MANBC are no longer working. Nice.

            http://twitchy.com/2012/09/11/hillary-clinton-walks-back-us-embassys-statement-confirms-fatality-in-benghazi-violence/

          • reader

            MSNBC, or, as Mark Levin aptly calls it, MSLSD.

          • Americana

            reader, either you’re just not capable of putting facts together or you don’t read enough. The American and Libyan militia forces that finally dispersed the Islamic jihadi fighters and got into the American consular compound only found Smith’s body because Ambassador Stevens’ body had been located by friends coming to rescue Stevens. Those men took him to a hospital. The Americans later discovered that Stevens had been pronounced DEAD IN HOSPITAL. So, no, of course Amb. Stevens could not be accounted for by the American rescue forces because he wasn’t found inside the American consular compound.

          • Americana

            The timeline is the official one from the Pentagon. It’s got a CNN timeline because CNN published it on their site but it’s from the Pentagon.

          • reader

            The timeline has one personnel – Sean Smith – dead within about an hour the assault began. It took another 6 hours for Clinton to confirm that one death. There is absolutely no information about when the rest of the personnel were killed. Enlighten us.

          • Americana

            Ambassador Stevens and Information Officer Smith were dead within the first hour and a half. The next two Americans died in the next phase of the attack. You’re STILL NOT CLEAR on who died when after all this time and despite still not being clear about the timeline you’re going to claim there were U,S. forces that could have arrived to save Ambassador Stevens and IO Smith?

          • reader

            CNN: Communist News Network: “We rewriting history and rapidly losing ratings!”

          • Americana

            Since your BB handle is “reader,” you’d best read everything that’s directed at you. I said that the timeline had a CNN dateline but that it was the PENTAGON’S OWN TIMELINE. CNN had nothing to do w/the compilation of the timeline it posted on its website and used in its stories; the PENTAGON was responsible for the timeline.

          • Americana

            No need to feel there’s a substantial difference between a Marine FAST Team and a SEAL team, fact is, for neither of those teams did the TIME SCHEDULE work for either one to arrive in time to prevent this tragedy..

          • Americana

            Are you just incapable of reading English? What is so mysterious about WHERE this timeline comes from? How much PLAINER can English get than the following:

            (CNN) — **The PENTAGON** released Friday an hour-by-hour timeline of the September 11 assault…

            That states right there in the first sentence that CNN is publishing a timeline provided by the PENTAGON. As far as I know, the Pentagon **is NOT a subsidiary** of either the Huffington Post or CNN.

          • Pete

            There are no politicians among the military officers at the Pentagon?

            We saw how the Obama administration, your dream team, lied about the video. They have not come clean yet.

            “Reply to “10 Reasons Not to Vote for a Veteran””

            http://sofrep.com/35197/reply-10-reasons-vote-veteran/

          • Americana

            Ah, Earth to Pete, Earth to PETE! If there was a timeline released that was not accurate, there would be former military who would have come forward and proved the timeline was a falsehood. If there were Special Forces from whatever source that could have made it to Benghazi in time to prevent those deaths, they would have gotten there.

            Getting there after the fact is heroic and it shows we’re willing to go into harm’s way to save Americans but if sending those Special Forces troops wouldn’t have saved those Americans who died, then what’s proved is that we couldn’t get relief forces there in time. Besides which, there were American Special Forces who were sent on orders. The fact some SP units were told to “Stand Down” while others were dispatched is the way the situation unfolded.
            ___________________________________________________

            The following part of the timeline has THREE DIFFERENT Special Forces groups being collected from various bases and being deployed to staging bases:

            1:30 a.m. — A six-man security team from the U.S. Embassy in Tripoli arrives in Benghazi.

            2:39 a.m. to 2:53 a.m. — The National Military Command Center gives FORMAL AUTHORIZATION for the deployment of the TWO special operations force teams from Croatia and the United States.

            5:15 a.m. — Attackers launch assault on a second U.S. facility in Benghazi. Two former U.S. Navy SEALs acting as security contractors are killed. They are identified as Tyrone Woods and Glen Doherty.

            7:57 p.m. — The U.S. special operations force team based in Croatia arrives at a staging base in Italy.

            8:56 p.m. — One of the Marine anti-terrorist teams from Spain arrives in Tripoli.

            9:28 p.m. — The U.S.-based special operations force team arrives at its staging base in Italy.

          • Pete

            My argument was not a time line argument.

            In one of your arguments you said that they have military officers and that of course we must believe them.

            My link was to show that many officers can be very political. That is they are politicians. So don’t trot out the Pentagon argument and expect to convince people.

          • Americana

            Do you intentionally play dumb when it suits you? If there were a military person — of whatever rank — who figured out there were units that could have been deployed fast enough to have arrived and fought off the first attack and those units weren’t deployed, they would have come forward by now. Every military person had access to the Pentagon timeline, and if it were disputable, you can be sure they would have found a way to trash it.

            There are MULTIPLE WAYS to come forward w/TOTAL ANONYMITY and disclose such facts and only disclose who you are to a very few individuals. Almost any news organization would have at least evaluated such information and granted the person providing it source immunity. Wikileaks would have been one of the easiest for someone to feed information to but there are countless others.

          • Pete

            Wikileaks is still effective?

            How many times have they ran to the Russians?

            How many times have they leaked about Americans versus the Russians? Hmmmm per the number of Wikileak leaks of the Russians they must be nearly angelic.

            “The Kremlin’s Propaganda War On The Internet Is In Full Swing”

            http://warnewsupdates.blogspot.com/2014/08/the-kremlins-propaganda-war-on-internet.html

        • WhiteHunter

          Ignore the troll, Drakken. This is at least the 10th, maybe the 50th, time (s)he has been harping on the Rumsfeld/Rapid Response thing, in posts all over FPM; it’s really a case of little Johnny One Note, or “when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” Doesn’t deserve a response at all; just a downvote and a flag. Enough of the long-winded nonsense we always get from this troll.

          Just ignore him/her/it. You can’t have a serious debate or even discussion with someone this brainwashed, blind, and delusional, any more than you can with one of Kim Jong Un’s brainwashed robots. For that kind, it’s always the Dear Leader is Great! first, last, and always..

          • Americana

            What a laugh a minute you are, WhittleHunter. You don’t even have the military awareness to realize that Rapid Response Forces are not always going to save the day. Ah, so flagging posts you don’t like is a way to eliminate them, huh? Thanks for the tactical tip.

  • Zamprogno Augusta

    well in France it is all Sarkozy’s fault !
    looks like a leftist syndrom

  • flappdoodle

    That 40% comprises the old media, academia and entertainment. Time to do something about THEIR power.

  • Lanna

    The Left never takes responsibility for their failures. Bush was a responsible President, who was NOT a muslim, the ole blame Bush strategy is Lame….people now see Obama’s presidency as enabling aggressors!

  • Docs357

    I’ve been asking myself that question for years . He has wasted our resources out talent Ruined our reputation . Because he’s a Muslim who wants what ever Muslim wants and the left fell for it hook line and sinker.

  • Christopher Riddle

    I think there is a “New Scandal”waiting to unfold?Millions of American Babies have had”Lobotomies”???These are(otherwise)known as”Obongo Voters”?????

  • Mo86

    “In all seriousness, how is it possible that 40% of Americans can still be giving him a thumbs-up?”

    I wonder that almost every day.

  • Paul of Alexandria

    Most of the Obama supporters that I’ve had occasion to talk to will not admit – or possibly can’t see – that there is anything wrong (except for the climate, of course). The economy is doing just fine, we have good employment numbers, businesses are simply too greedy and won’t pay their fair share, it’s all Israel’s fault for beating up on those poor Palestinians. One starts to feel rather like Cassandra.

  • Gee

    Kept the US out of war? You mean like Libya, Yemen, Pakistan, and back into Iraq.

    By the way the General killed was a Major General (2-star rank) not a Brigadier General (1-star rank).

  • Infidel4Ever

    The power of Obama’s Jedi Mind Trick is something to behold. I’m sure somewhere Yoda is green with envy.
    While a few of my Obama voting friends have seen the light, most have not. I simply can’t speak politics with those people, everything always comes back to being Bush’s fault. They just can’t let go of that while they wildly cling to their fraud messiah.

  • carpe diem 36

    “He’s keeping the country out of war, he’s keeping the economy stable –” this reminds me of the joke of this man who is jumping from the 100 floor, when he reached the 28th floor someone asked him how he is doing and he replied: “so far so good”. So Obama is doing so far so good.

  • http://shugartpoliticalaction.shugartmedia.com/uncommonsense/ Chris Shugart

    Blind fanatical loyalty is not a faculty of reason. In 1945, when Berlin was surrounded by Russian troops, even Hitler’s approval ratings were probably still somewhere above zero. And I’ll bet there were those shouting, “It’s von Hindenburg’s fault!”

  • Thomas Wells

    Two words : brain damage.

  • DinaRehn

    The sycophantic supporters of Obama need to realize they are also complicit in his attempts at bringing down liberty and destroying the country.

    Obama created the illegal invasion and refuses to do his Constitutionally mandated duty in securing the border, enforcing the law and protecting the people.

    Those on the national socialist left who still support the man are accessories to the man’s crimes – no matter how much they’d like to somehow blame it all on Bush.

    Judge Jeanine Makes Shocking Allegations Of Obama’s Plan To Destroy America
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=mOBirTiaaTc

  • wileyvet

    “…just plain stubbornness among those who can’t admit that their Messiah is a false prophet.” Like Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. Many people would rather cling to lies and deception that conform to what they want the world to be, rather than what it is. Avoid truth and unpleasant reality, and you don’t have to make any hard choices based on that truth. Obama was and is a charlatan, full of platitudes and delusion, nothing more. An empty suit, like the emptiness of leftist ideology. Obama is the poster boy for dangerous radical dogma, and an example of failed ideas and doctrine. One hundred years of progressive BS has culminated in the Great Wizard of Oz occupying the White House. How much further back can the curtain be pulled before people come to their senses and recognize what radicals have done to America and the world? What will it take for people to see the vacuousness of leftist and progressive thinking? The so called smartest man in the room is surrounded by obsequious yes men and women, and an ego that overrides his true self, which is a hesitant, incompetent, indecisive failure and a boob.

  • Crassus

    Didn’t Frank Luntz say he was getting out of the polling biz to pursue other projects after the election of 2012?

  • http://www.apolllospeaks.com/ ApolloSpeaks

    I SUPPORT BARACK (WORSE-THAN-WATERGATE) OBAMA

    to be the second president after Richard Nixon to resign from office. If he doesn’t resign he will be totally crushed by events. For the present is prelude to worse.

    Click http://www.apollospeaks.com for more on this subject.

  • Arlie

    Bush had me fooled and I though he was “good”. In 2007 Obama scared the holy what-ever out of me with what he was saying during campaign. I knew he was a Commie by what he was saying. I didn’t figure out Bush until I learned about Progressives. Then it all made sense. The Progressives have infiltrated both parties and I learned about “republican in name only” and “big government” etc. Now I understand so much more of what the elite corporate welfare crowd with the aide of the government have committed and they all horrify me. Their commine/fascist/bigoted outright corruption and stench should scare every honest American. If people can’t see it..they are blind and deaf. Obama is Bush on steroids only sneakier, more lawless with Holder at DOJ and backed by the corporate government media dogs. A total criminal, in-your-face regime.

  • Armed_Infidel

    American jews still overwhelming support Hussein Obama.

  • WTFUAMERIKA

    If you love your country you have to hate him.
    If you hate your country you have to love him.
    I see no “Gray” here. You?
    Hope is Chains. He lied about that too. Has he not yet earned the name of DOMESTIC ENEMY?

  • truebearing

    “How can anyone support Obama?”

    Great question. The defining question of our time. Only the truly stupid, gullible, and racist support him now, and it is 40% of our population. They bring the American IQ average down to around 60.

  • Pericles

    “…how else could so many Americans convince themselves that nothing in the current state of affairs can possibly be Obama’s fault?”

    There is one thing that is GWB’s fault. That one thing is Obama. Obama is Bush’s legacy. There could not have been a BHO without a GWB! Anymore than there could have been a Bill Clinton without GWB’s father. Had the Bushs’ remained faithful to Ronald Reagan’s conservative philosophy we would have been spared Bill Clinton and Barack Obama.

    Men like John McCain and Mitt Romney are not substitutes for Ronald Reagan. They are the kind of men that will allow Democrats to regain power because their positions and policies do not stand in sharp contrast to those of the Democrats and because they cannot articulate effectively the advantages and benefits of smaller government, more self-reliance, lower taxation and other conservative principles and beliefs.

  • Guest

    And then there’s this:

  • Tchiock

    So, it’s them or us— Who’s it gonna be?

  • bigjulie

    Our real problem is that so-called Republican “leadership” is complicit in the creation and support of a political “establishment” in Washington DC that is fuelled by “big money” donors from the nuveau riche dot com-ers to George Soros. They are sworn enemies of Conservatives because Conservatives do not react to offers of big money donations for quid pro quo political actions that the moneyed class requires in exchange for their largesse.
    What is bedeviling to inside-the-beltway Republicans? “it’s the money, stupid!!” That’s why they are actually no better than the Democrats and the real reason why Tea Party Conservatives “can’t be trusted”! They “stupidly” still run on Principle which is not what the Chamber of Crony Capitalism has in mind!

  • Pepe Turcon

    Obama is a paradox, it’s God’s way to wake people up otherwise kiss it good by BUT the Gringos will come back, just wait.

  • bob e

    barry o’fraud is black .. that is the only reason for the phony contortions from these morons including c-lutz ..