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.