The Koch brothers are worth over 500m and you're claiming the Democrats hoard more because Hillary is worth 34m?
No, I was actually suggesting that MARIS is being hypocritical by decrying rich people's hoarding of wealth on myriad other threads, but lauding Hillary and Obama's business savvy for the same in this thread. I have no problem with rich people being rich. MARIS generally does, unless (apparently) they're democrats.
It's no speck of dust. Losing an ambassador is a rare event. Only 7 lost in history. It sure was a volatile region. We did after losing the ambassador what we should have done before - closed the embassy. It's not like we had no warning, we had just helped overthrow the government there to turn it into a lawless place.
You're confusing me with MARIS. I provided the info about their net worth. W's net worth is $27M. They're welcome to make as much money as they're able, as far as I care.
Once again, it seems we need to be reminded about MARIS' sig: It's why I don't bother answering his posts.
Human loss is human loss, ambassador or journalist or foot soldier all equally valuable, all tragedies, this instance is not exclusive in it's circumstance but sure made good fuel for political attacks at home. I thought it was tasteless to use this against an administration already up to it's elbows in middle eastern chaos.
I'm sorry, but are you out of your mind? The attack happened...wait for it...SEPTEMBER FREAKING 11TH!!! The Administration didn't protect these people before the attack, defend them during the attack and then tried to falsely blame it on a video, and it's "tasteless" to criticize them for it? Seriously, I don't know what to say to that kind of thought process.
The fact that some people get secret service protection, some get military protection, some get both, and most get nothing, indicates all are not "equally valuable" in the eyes of the government.
Maybe I am out of my mind but I don't look at calendar dates as birthdays or anniversaries. Never have. If every time innocent people are killed, you mark it on a calendar, the calendar would be filled to the brim. Yes it is tasteless to criticize them for it. In the war on terror, you're not going to win every battle or shore up every wall of defense no matter how much you dislike the administration. If govt were so informed then the twin towers would have been avoided? Probably not. Hilary took the blame for that tragedy and I commend her for that. Personally I blame the terrorists for the killing, not the American govt
It's become clear as the incident was investigated that: 1) The administration outright lied about some video on YouTube being the reason for the attack 2) The administration sent out its ambassador to the UN to lie on several Sunday news programs 3) Hillary was in charge, it was a State Department matter 4) There were numerous warnings that the embassy was in danger 5) There were numerous requests for a stronger military presence for defensive purposes 6) There were previous attacks on the embassy 7) No forces were brought to bear to try and save the people, even though the firefight went on for hours and they watched it on TV in the white house. 8) When congress questioned her about the incident, her response was "what does it matter." Of course we should question her decision making ability, it was on full display. From being part of the lies to choosing not to protect the embassy and ambassador to even having him stationed there in the first place. Hillary lied, the ambassador died. The ads write themselves.
So, you're saying that September 11th is no different than any other day, that it has no significance for Al Qaeda and therefore we should take extra security measures? I'll just say I strongly disagree.
Come on man... You can't seriously believe what you are saying. The Govt had every opportunity to protect our citizens, especially on September 11th. Every Embassy in hostile areas should be protected to the max on that day. All of this could have been avoided.
Can someone correct the spelling error in the title of the thread? "Looses" instead of "loses" drives me nuts.
He was the least ambassadorial of the 7. He was a CIA operative. Only after he died was his name made public. Then Republicans claimed that since he headed the secret CIA station, he was the equivalent of an ambassador. Write them, then. I'll help. "Waaahhh!!! Nobody gives a shit about a Republican talking points list!!" Run that or any ad and waste your money.
CIA or not, outrageously stupid conspiracy theory or not, there's no excuse to not protect the people and the embassy. How about we try to find a candidate we don't need to apologize for? Or make up silly excuses for?
