Posted on 10/17/2012 9:25:20 AM PDT by Red Badger
Kerry Ladka stood before President Obama at last night’s town hall-style debate and asked the question that would touch off an onstage verbal brawl and, later, an intense national discussion. Here’s how it went:
Q: It’s Kerry, Kerry Ladka.
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Great to see you here.
Q: This question actually comes from a brain trust of my friends at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola yesterday. We were sitting around talking about Libya, and we were reading and became aware of reports that the State Department refused extra security for our embassy in Benghazi, Libya, prior to the attacks that killed four Americans. Who was it that denied enhanced security and why?
Was Ladka satisfied with how the president responded? Simply no. “I really didn’t think he totally answered the question satisfactorily as far as I was concerned,” Ladka tells the Erik Wemple Blog.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
While Obozo was giving his response, I yelled at the TV, "HE'S NOT ANSWERING THE QUESTION!"
He didn’t answer any of the questions.
On the equal pay for women question, he just launched into his familiar anecdote about his granny and skipped the answer part completely.
>> Why is the GOP going along with having these anti-Romney liberals?” <<
.
Because they are happy with Obama’s promotion of their mutually desired agenda of destroying our national sovereignty.
Romney might do as well.
The real question, despite the clouds of ink floating about, is why the Obama Administration put an American Ambassador in the middle of a country that recently had undergone a civil war overthrowing an entreanched despot, and in the ensuing confusion attracted to it’s borders the most radical Islamic Jihadists from throughout the muslim world, with what amounted to no security forces of any consequence.
This question is dangling in the air both unasked and unanswered...
The easily predictable result of Ambassador Stevens’ posting into a hostile environment, sans realistic protection, is now the subject of cover-ups, misdirection, finger pointing, faux responsbility taking without consequence, etc., etc..... which only serves to illuminate the glaring incompetency of the Obama administration.
I think the answer lies in what was reported as Hillary!’s response when she heard that our consulate had been attacked:
How can they do that to us? We liberated them!
It is telling in that she apparently really believed that our personnel were safe simply out of gratitude for our assistance in ridding them of Kadaffi. Never taking into account that other elements were inside the country that had a contrary view. Liberals think that when they do something that is the end of hate and anger towards them. They cannot think past the end of the day. As Ann Coulter once said, “To a liberal, history began at breakfast this morning.”
To that I would add, “To a liberal, the future doesn’t go past bedtime tonight.”...........................
Excerpt:
President Obama, though, wasn’t done with Kerry Ladka. “After the debate, the president came over to me and spent about two minutes with me privately,” says the 61-year-old Ladka, who works at Global Telecom Supply in Mineola, N.Y. According to Ladka, Obama gave him ”more information about why he delayed calling the attack a terorist attack.” For background, Obama did apparently lump Benghazi into a reference to “acts of terror” in a Sept. 12 Rose Garden address. However, he spent about two weeks holding off on using the full “terrorist” designation. The rationale for the delay, Obama explained to Ladka, was to make sure that the “intelligence he was acting on was real intelligence and not disinformation,” recalls Ladka.
As to Ladka’s question about who turned down the Benghazi security requests and why, Obama reportedly told him that “releasing the individual names of anyone in the State Department would really put them at risk,” Ladka says.
End of excerpt
Why wasn’t Obama also waiting to see if the “intelligence” indicating it was a demonstration from the YouTube video run amok was real and not disinformation?
The person who made the decision, so we are told, is named Lamb and she testified in front of Congress last week about it. Doesn’t Obama know this?
Re: Hillary’s “How can they do that to us? We liberated them!”
Exactly....This statement underlines the naivete of Obama/Hillary and disqualifies them as stewards of the American Dream. (Besides the obvious underlining untruh that “we” liberated them. The Obama Administration offered little other than hot air until ‘daffy died, whereupon they dashed in for the credit earned by the French and English.))
Of course he/they know it. They knew AT THE TIME that it was an all out terrorist attack, BUT that would not square with his “Bin Laden is dead - GM is alive” campaign theme. He’s claimed to have done away with Al-Queda, so it could not be them................
Hillary! should resign.
Obama should fire her.
Neither is likely to happen.
Underlings heads will roll..................
Got that right!
Taking “Responsibility” without consequences is a farce. Note that thats what all Liberals do....I take responsibility....the buck stops here..... there, I’ve said it....lets move on now!”
As for Obama......he’s gonna take responsibilty Nov 6 when we force it upon him by, as Clint says..... “letting him go!”
Regarding Libya, we have a President of the United States who is lying to us, during wartime, about an attack on us by the enemy with whom we are at war. He is not doing this to protect the route of a troop ship or for some other national security reason. He is doing it to cover-up his errors for political reasons to preserve his re-election chances.
Kerry Ladka >>>>>
He is on Greta tonight and can ‘splain himself. It looks like he is on our side.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.