|Back to Home > Bulletin Board > Current Events > Topic: Susan Rice|
Posted - 6/5/2013 12:35:33 PM | show profile | flag this post
The benefits of taking one for the team.
Presuming she actually believed what the WH told her to say re the Benghazi event, I'm not sure she's smart enough to advise the Chicago types on National Security. But then the WH probably doesn't care.
Posted - 6/5/2013 12:43:19 PM | show profile | flag this post
a slap in the face to the families of those that were killed in benghazi .
the white house won't think twice about making a liar national security adviser. dear leader knows state-controlled media will provide him cover- and defend him like always.
Posted - 6/5/2013 1:02:25 PM | show profile | flag this post
"making a liar national security adviser."
Wait, Cheney has been appointed Obama's national security adviser?
Or did you mean Donald Rumsfeld?
It's always confusing when you post as one name and then respond with another.
Posted - 6/5/2013 1:31:14 PM | show profile | flag this post
One more time;
The absolute stupidity regarding the entire Benghazi tragedy was the Intelligence community thinking it could whip up some lame talking points in the hopes it would never bite them in the ass. You think we would have learned.
You know. Like Colin Powell got caught doing at the United Nations. Like President Bush got caught doing with his 'yellow cake uranium' speech. Cheney, Rummy and the rest with their 'month long war and greeted as liberators' crap. CIA's Tenet and his 'slam dunk'...
So Obama thinks Rice got a bum rap but she's too valuable NOT to have in the West Wing. His prerogative.
"I'm not sure she's smart enough". Yea newscred. Cornell University economics professor, governor of the Federal Reserve System, education policy scholar, currently at the Brookings Institution. Stanford University, Truman Scholarship, and graduated with a BA in history, Phi Beta Kappa, Rhodes Scholarship, New College, Oxford, MPhil in 1988 and DPhil in 1990. You're obviously smarter than she is.
"Dear Leader". Jeez guy(s). Get over it. Or, as they say, how's that Romney landslide workin out for ya?
Posted - 6/5/2013 2:58:19 PM | show profile | flag this post
*** "I'm not sure she's smart enough". Yea newscred. Cornell University economics professor, governor of the Federal Reserve System, education policy scholar, currently at the Brookings Institution. Stanford University, Truman Scholarship, and graduated with a BA in history, Phi Beta Kappa, Rhodes Scholarship, New College, Oxford, MPhil in 1988 and DPhil in 1990. ***
Well. She *is* a woman. Hillary, Condoleeza, Janet N., Janet R., Madeleine, Juanita, Hilda, Elizabeth and Elaine all had that "smart enough" problem.
Posted - 6/5/2013 3:02:55 PM | show profile | flag this post
The talking points...
were created by the CIA to protect classified and sensitive information.
They were created with information known at the time and contained information that was approved for release at the time.
Rice never lied. No one died because of the talking points.
I'm amazed at the faux outrage from right wing conspiracy nuts over these talking points -- the same right wingers who still claim the Bush administration was only saying what it knew at the time when it claimed there were WMDs in Iraq.
Sorry, wingnuts. Your partisan nonsense destroys your credibility on Benghazi.
Rice will make an excellent NSA.
Posted - 6/5/2013 3:39:02 PM | show profile | flag this post
yes, she will.. and the cherry on the sundae is..
there's not a thing the rightwingnuts can do about it..
they have NO say whatever in her taking the job..
Posted - 6/5/2013 5:12:29 PM | show profile | flag this post
I'm not sure she's smart enough
An advanced education, years of experience and a track record of success are certainly not enough to prove Susan Rice is "smart enough". Especially when it comes to 'Chicago types", who just talk about da bears and da cubs all day long.
Funny how someone like that ends up in the White House working at a rewarding and desirable career in government while truly intelligent "smart" observers like newscred and con/puzo are reduced to posting on this message boards.
Life just isn't fair.
Posted - 6/5/2013 6:38:42 PM | show profile | flag this post
"They were created with information known at the time"
wrong. "they" knew the attack wasn't spontaneous or based on a you tube video.
Posted - 6/5/2013 7:29:02 PM | show profile | flag this post
con.. i suppose you can prove that statement?
actually, I don't think you can..
so i'm calling you a liar..
Posted - 6/5/2013 7:50:51 PM | show profile | flag this post
I never said she wasn't college smart.
If any of you read my post, you'll see I didn't make a blanket statement that "she isn't smart enough". I said "Presuming she actually believed what the WH told her to say about Benghazi..." which of course isn't the same as saying she's not smart. As is the case with some many, if you disagree with something you only grab and reference the relevant to your argument parts.
By the way, having umpteen degrees doesn't mean someone's smart about everything in life. There are a lot of heavily credentialed Phd's who are teaching because they don't have the required common sense to actually work in the fields they teach. But that's another story.
Posted - 6/5/2013 8:24:24 PM | show profile | flag this post
It Wasn't a Blanket Statement at All
I didn't see anything about blankets, or sheets for that matter. Not that you wear sheets newscred, I'm not saying you do. Maybe you do, with a hood, but I'm not saying that.
It was simply a broadly worded statement insulting Rice's intelligence and ability while denigrating the Obama administration by making another broad statement about staff members and insulting people from Chicago.
Nothing about blankets there.
Posted - 6/5/2013 9:06:18 PM | show profile | flag this post
Taking a page from the 'cruise school of quoting' I see...
"I said "Presuming she actually believed what the WH told her to say about Benghazi..." No, that's not the full quote is it? What you actually said was: "Presuming she actually believed what the WH told her to say re the Benghazi event, I'm not sure she's smart enough to advise the Chicago types on National Security."
What part of "I'm not sure she's smart enough" isn't insulting?
Besides the asinine reference to 'Chicago types' (Which never made any sense anyway). Of course I agree with you that "degrees doesn't mean someone's smart about everything in life" (which isn't grammatically correct btw, so let's not throw stones)...it's their whole life experience plus the education, right? Well, this lady has it, and besides that--It's not your call or my call is it?? These people serve at the 'Pleasure of the President', they don't have to be confirmed, so he can hire anyone he wants.
And con? "they" knew"??? "THEY"???? Well, that settles everything. Everyone from the FBI to Military Intelligence to the CIA to Congress, and a few thousand reporters are still investigating Benghazi. Last I heard we still haven't fingered the head guy. You may not sleep at night until we have Mulder and Scully on the case, but rest assured, we will find this guy. Now, IF..YOU..have absolute definitive knowledge of who THEY were, we'd all ove to hear it.
Posted - 6/5/2013 9:49:27 PM | show profile | flag this post
They make 'em different there. They're made of different stuff. They're just not like you or me.
God, didn't Breitbart die a while back? Can't all the stupidisms that he promoted be interred with his bones?
Posted - 6/6/2013 8:51:26 AM | show profile | flag this post
so now newsscred is slamming both women and college professors..nice work . two stereotypes from a man
who clearly knows little about college teaching. trust
me.. the brainy types who can't teach don't last.
Posted - 6/6/2013 10:39:51 AM | show profile | flag this post
the obama administration knew within 24 hours this was a planned al-qaeda linked attack.
this has been proven with emails and c-span testimony.
the obama administration decided to spend the next 7 days lying to america and trying to make nakoula basseley nakoula their patsy.
being called a "liar" by someone who is so willfully ignorant?
sad. but typical of troo-believers.
Posted - 6/6/2013 1:57:10 PM | show profile | flag this post
Again, there goes any shred of dignity, believability, and/or 'Why should anyone listen to you?'...the second you play the "troo-believers" card...Good. Grief. And you still wonder why we call you people 'wingnuts'.
Posted - 6/6/2013 2:19:38 PM | show profile | flag this post
care to back that up?
Cite the specific emails. They're all public.
There were spontaneous protests based on the YouTube video in FOUR cities that day. The CIA was confused for some time about what actually happened. The original thought was that a militant group may have taken advantage of the protest to launch an attack.
Remember, also, the "diplomatic post" attacked was little more than a cover for the CIA operation to seize anti-aircraft missiles from militants in the region.
Also, if you want to continue to claim that Rice lied, then you MUST admit that Bush and his entire cabinet LIED about WMDs.
Do you? Well, do you?
Posted - 6/6/2013 3:12:24 PM | show profile | flag this post
what does benghazi have to do with bush and wmd's?
the obama administration knew within 24 hours this was a planned al-qaeda linked attack.
the obama administration knowing lied- so benghazi wouldn't hurt his re-election.
it was just a matter of finding a patsy-and a willing media.
Posted - 6/6/2013 5:08:30 PM | show profile | flag this post
Sooner or later con;
You really have to put up or shut up.
"the obama administration knew within 24 hours this was a planned al-qaeda linked attack." Show me that definite proof. Because no one else has found it. (And any group 'taking credit' for an attack is not proof of anything) And tell me again--HOW--knowing who's taking credit for the attack within a day of the attack, would have prevented the attack. You're hoping, (with tons of company), that there's gotta be a smokin gun somewhere. There isn't.
This has gotten so out of hand that even Jonathan Karl of ABC (Yea--that guy who was praised by wingnuts for reporting on 'emails' that turned out NOT to be emails, but edited garbage fed by Republican staffers)--That guy--he actually thought he could rdeeem his reputation by sticking UP for Susan Rice yesterday:
"If we learned anything in all the back and forth over the Benghazi talking points – the 12 revisions first reported by ABC News, the 100 pages of emails released by the White House, etc. – we learned this: Susan Rice got a bad rap." No shit Jon. Thanks for your fifteen minutes.
Back to you con: "the obama administration knowing lied- so benghazi wouldn't hurt his re-election." This was SEPTEMBER. As the president said: "“On Benghazi, we’ve now seen this argument that’s been made by some folks on Capitol Hill for months now. Here’s what we know: Americans died in Benghazi. Clearly they were not in a position where they were adequately protected. The day after it happened, I acknowledged that it was an act of terrorism.”
"There’s no there, there. Keep in mind, these so called talking points, five-six days after the attack occurred pretty much matched the assessment I had.” He said that 2-3 days after Susan Rice appeared on TV shows with the talking points, he sent out the information that became the basis for assuming it was terrorism. If this was an effort to downplay what was happening, it would be odd for the White House to put out the information showing it was a terrorist attack. He asked, “Who stages a cover up for just three days?”
Benghazi figured into why Romney lost?? Really?!?!?! You buy that?
Posted - 6/7/2013 12:59:17 PM | show profile | flag this post
"The day after it happened, I acknowledged that it was an act of terrorism.”
fact checkers rate that a lie.
no wonder you are so confused.......... don't let that stop you from regurgitating talking points.
Posted - 6/7/2013 1:17:13 PM | show profile | flag this post
We've been through that
Ad Nauseum. It's in the ear of the beholder apparently.
(From the article you just cited):
Immediately after the attack, the president three times used the phrase “act of terror” in public statements:
“No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.”
— Obama, Rose Garden, Sept. 12
“We want to send a message all around the world — anybody who would do us harm: No act of terror will dim the light of the values that we proudly shine on the rest of the world, and no act of violence will shake the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Las Vegas, Sept. 13
“I want people around the world to hear me: To all those who would do us harm, no act of terror will go unpunished. It will not dim the light of the values that we proudly present to the rest of the world. No act of violence shakes the resolve of the United States of America.”
— Obama, campaign event in Golden, Colo., Sept. 13
That was pretty clear to me then and now. You're entitled to your own opinion.
Posted - 6/8/2013 12:59:05 PM | show profile | flag this post
So what was she supposed to do?
She went on the talk shows with information that was given her. She wasn't there so obviously had to give out the information she was given. What would you suggest instead? As for Obama not calling it a terrorist attack, who gives a shit? What does it matter who did it or what their reason was? That is all after the fact speculation and it a completely worthless point about Obama.