Benghazi Baloney: Review Journal Unworthy Newspaper

The amateurish editorial board at the Las Vegas Review Journal has shown us once again its ugly partisan bias, lack of principles, and total reckless disregard of the truth in its recent editorial which attempted to slam Obama for Benghazi, yelling loudly that he is “unworthy” of being a president. They really showed us how

The amateurish editorial board at the Las Vegas Review Journal has shown us once again its ugly partisan bias, lack of principles, and total reckless disregard of the truth in its recent editorial which attempted to slam Obama for Benghazi, yelling loudly that he is “unworthy” of being a president.

They really showed us how deep seated their hatred of Barack Obama really is.  In their narrative they depict Obama as a heartless traitor who sat and watched as fellow Americans died at the hands of Muslim extremists.  Really?  You have to really really hate the guy to believe that.  Once again, the RJ editors are not relying on facts to come to conclusions. Convoluted speculation at best, this narrative truly stinks of malicious revisionist history that would make the Orwellian Ministry of Information blush.  I can only imagine Glen Cook being capable of telling a lie so eloquently.

The Obama administration sat by doing nothing for seven hours that night, ignoring calls to dispatch help from our bases in Italy, less than two hours away.

Cook (I assume) further cooks up a fat batch of baloney bull with this baldfaced lie:

Prompt and strong action from the White House on Sept. 11 might have saved American lives, as well as America’s reputation as a nation not to be messed with. Weakness and dithering and flying to Las Vegas the next day for celebrity fund-raising parties are somehow better?

Going to have to call out the RJ on perjury/libel on this one.  In fact, Obama came to Las Vegas for a campaign rally open to the press which I attended.  It was not a “celebrity fund-raising party.”  This has been debunked, but the Review Journal editors hate Obama so much that they feel okay printing any fiction that suits their concocted narrative.  The irony is that while Obama didn’t attend a fundraiser that day, Mitt Romney did.

Later in the article they have the gal to talk about “four years of misguided foreign policy” after 8 years of Bush who spent a bloody fortune on two unnecessary wars and 12 US consulate attacks (not to mention terrorist attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center).  After plunging us into the depths of massive debt, George Bush’s policies have left this country less able to protect its own interests around the world.  How pathetic and unpatriotic for these clowns to politicize this tragedy and with such hypocrisy.  Considering idiot Romney believes Russia is our number one threat globally, the RJ should just shut up about foreign policy.  Colin Powell’s endorsement of Obama should have been enough.

To return to office a narcissistic amateur who seeks to ride this nation’s economy and international esteem to oblivion, like Slim Pickens riding the nuclear bomb to its target at the end of the movie “Dr. Strangelove,” would be disastrous.

Did I just read that in a newspaper editorial about the President of the United States, because that sounded more like a line from Rush Limbaugh.  Do they actually believe he “seeks to ride this nation’s economy and international esteem to oblivion”?  Or that his second term would be “disastrous” for our country?  This isn’t good solid criticism or analysis, it’s ignorant hard headed vitriol.

We’ve come to expect this kind of bias and deception from political ads, but now the RJ is starting to sound like Crossroads GPS.  Is Karl Rove now on staff?

The Las Vegas Review Journal is an embarrassment to journalism and to Las Vegas.  There are hard working and talented people working there, and this is no reflection of them… my remarks are of course limited to the editorial board.

I wonder if any heads will roll again after this election?  At this point, Sherm may as well be running things.

For an adult discussion of the Benghazi “controversy” (aka contrived right-wing hate propaganda) see here:


Here’s a great video of Geraldo saying exactly what I’m saying.  There is legitimate questions about 1) Why was the ambassador there if we couldn’t protect him 2) Why the initial hoopla about the video blamed for the genesis of the attack.  Those are questions I think people want explained further.  But these questions are far removed from the implied argument that Obama sat by while these guys were murdered.  That is where the “newspaper,” conservative pundits and many of the commentators below have gotten reckless.

Geraldo discusses why the video was probably used as inspiration to attackers in Benghazi:

Justin McAffee

Posts Carousel

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

Cancel reply


  • Alinosof
    November 3, 2012, 5:58 pm

    Thank you and kudos for calling out the Las Vegas Review Journal for their lack of intellectual honesty. The Review Journal has the right to express its opinion but the editors cannot twist and massage facts to their will and that’s what they did.

  • Larry Green
    November 3, 2012, 6:50 pm

    Typical review for supporters of Obama. As he said in his election campaign last time – Vote for him if you want “change.” Unfortunately the only change I find after the last 4 years is that I only have “change” left in my pocket. This is after his great “leadership” into pending national bankruptcy.

    • Justin McAffee@Larry Green
      November 3, 2012, 6:56 pm

      Larry, maybe you should get a real job and stop relying on the government to have more money in your pocket… because essentially that’s what you just said.

  • Pabst
    November 3, 2012, 6:57 pm

    It sounds like the writer of this blog is unworthy and the liar.

    1. The White House did indeed know about the raid as it was happening and yet didn’t deploy an immediate, military defense. The White House then lied repeatedly to the American people about the motive of the assault by blaming it on the “You-Tube” video.

    2. Your collective amnesia about the Bush era is typical of leftist idiots. Both the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars were approved by the Senate with Hillary, Biden and Reid voting YEA for each. Interestingly 27 OTHER Democrats voted NO but I guess Obama only wanted Iraq yes-men serving in his administration’s top two spots.

    3. Do you want to compare Bush deficits at $400b a year to Obama’s $1.1tr a year? And did you know that tax receipts are all the way back to 2007 levels YET Obama has increased spending by $900bil a year?

    4. Are you ok with Obama targeting U.S. citizens in Yemen (he’s killed three Americans there) and with unmanned drones vaporizing Pakistanis in a nation where military endeavors HAVEN’T been voted on by Congress?

    This is what I think: Justin McAffee is a Marxist scumbag, so his defense of Obama’s anti-libertarian record (Gitmo anyone?)is clouded by his love of Obama’s class-warfare rhetoric.

    • Wryly@Pabst
      November 3, 2012, 7:14 pm

      So THIS is what it looks like when Rush Limbaugh throws up. I guess it’s true after all – garbage in, garbage out.

      • Pabst@Wryly
        November 4, 2012, 7:33 am

        I guess your asinine comment is easier to write than rebutting any of my truths.

        • M.R. Heeman@Pabst
          November 9, 2012, 5:54 pm

          Remember as well, Bush used the EXACT REASONS liberals decried Saddam for in the 90s Clinton era to go to Iraq! Liberals voted FOR this ‘authorization’ to any and all force necessary (one can ‘google’ the exact language) to Bush43. Bush43 had everything he needed to do what he did.

          Of course, as with Vietnam, which Democrats started; liberals began giving ‘aid & comfort’ to America’s enemies not long after the beginning of the Iraq War. America’s enemies KNOW who their friends are, American liberals – in this day, Obamunists!

    • Johnny@Pabst
      November 4, 2012, 12:57 am

      Obama’s drone wars have inflicted far less “collateral damage” than the Bush/Cheney ground war (now at 4,00+ American soldiers dead, 100,000+ Iragi civilians dead, and $800B of American taxpayer money squandered…oh wait, that was unfunded spending, so it’s not current taxpayer money, the next few generations are stuck with that). And that was based on an organized, sustained campaign of lies about WMD, etc. Were you as outraged about that as you are about Benghazi, Pabst?

      • Pabst@Johnny
        November 4, 2012, 7:37 am

        I opposed the Iraq War. Ya know who voted FOR the Iraq War? Biden, Hillary, Reid, Lieberman,Kerry and Edwards.

        To your credit Johnny, at least you were accurate with your facts.

        • Justin J. McAffee@Pabst
          November 4, 2012, 10:14 am

          Correction… they voted in favor of giving the president “authorization.” They weren’t voting in favor of going to war. Granted, it they were truly opposed, maybe they should have refrained… but I think we all remember the political pressure Bush exploited to go to these ridiculous wars after 9/11.

          • Pabst@Justin J. McAffee
            November 4, 2012, 12:41 pm

            More Democrats voted AGAINST “authorization” than for. But Hillary, Biden and Reid STILL voted for. Why did they feel “pressure” that Kennedy, Boxer, Durbin and Byrd didn’t feel?

          • M.R. Heeman@Justin J. McAffee
            November 9, 2012, 6:05 pm

            Liberals forced Bush43 through the U.N. for 18 (ims) months before they voted to give him authorization; while Clinton just went and used NATO to go bomb the Balkens when he wanted to.

            Saddam, along with American liberals, expected as Saddam put it “the French to stop Bush in the Security Council”.

            Later, the world found out about all the backroom dealings WITH IRAQ, during a global embargo BY the U.N., that needed to be protected by our ‘allies’.

            Liberals = backstabbing hypocrites in league with America’s enemies against our nation, but ‘all in’ for their own political power.

    • M.R. Heeman@Pabst
      November 9, 2012, 6:12 pm

      Well done, ‘Pabst’. Couldn’t have ‘closed’ better myself!!

  • Wryly
    November 3, 2012, 7:07 pm

    I very much appreciate your journalistic integrity for calling “bullshit” on these right-wing demagogues. If the editors at the RJ are so desperate for the GOP to win back the White House that they’d sell their own worthless integrity for the cheap price of a few lies, then maybe they should have helped pick a candidate who isn’t a misogynistic, flip-flopping elitist bent on warping America into a blurry vision of his own convoluted ideologies.

    Let’s just hope that their tactics don’t pay off.

  • Butch Patton
    November 3, 2012, 7:27 pm

    You failed to mention that the President of which you defend blamed this event on a “Youtube video”!! This had to be lowest remark I have ever witnessed an American President make in regards to an attack on America. Really??? A Youtube video?? Obama gave an open door to terrorists around the world who might be upset over a silly video of which there is plenty of hate on Youtube and other social media.
    The bottom line is Obama FAILED in his responsibility as Commander-in-Chief, and instead of blaming a video should of been honest with his constituents, Democrat, Republican, Independent, etc.
    You see what your problem is? Obama is President of ALL America, not just the Democrats!

    • Johnny@Butch Patton
      November 4, 2012, 12:51 am

      You guys are clinging pretty tightly to the video line, even though it’s been over a month since anyone has blamed anything on that. Get over that…everyone else has moved on as new information comes to light.


Latest Posts

Top Authors

Most Commented

Featured Videos