Skip to main content

View Diary: RNC wanted to make Benghazi attacks an issue in 2012, but Romney said no (23 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's De ja Vu all over again - McCain put the (5+ / 0-)

    kibosh on the "muslim-Kenyan-socialist" crap in 2008 and Romney did the same with Benghazi in 2012.

    Looks like the base is going to have a real incentive to make sure someone with the correct quotient of "balls" is the 2016 GOP nominee, one who is not afraid to play dirty.

    Cruz/Paul 2016!

    •  be our guests (7+ / 0-)

      they will lose in an even wider margin

      this is the kind of politics that turns off vast numbers of Americans.  They are hoping they can depress the vote and keep their base.  But nowadays one is starting to see a backlash, starting with Romney's 47% remarks, and continuing through the visceral disgust with blocking reasonable background checks for buying guns.  

      They should listen to Lindsay Graham, who warned that there aren't enough old white guys.

      "We didn't set out to save the world; we set out to wonder how other people are doing and to reflect on how our actions affect other people's hearts." - Pema Chodron

      by teacherken on Thu May 09, 2013 at 02:53:29 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  To the extent that the GOP base is (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sue B

      convinced that Obama stole this election by covering up Benghazi, it is good for us. The last thing we want them to blame the loss on are things like a bad selection of primary candidates, and bad nominee and VP nominee, a poor GOTV effort, and a poor message aimed at a dying demographic. If they continue to believe that none of these things were to blame, that it was just a case of Obama cheating by telling his minions to "not mention terrorism" in the weeks leading up to the election, terrific.

      As far as I'm concerned, there is no downside to the Democrats of the crazy GOP base continuing to chant "Benghazi!" all the way through til November 2016.

    •  Please proceed. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      msmacgyver, joynow

      "Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity." --M. L. King "You can't fix stupid" --Ron White -6.00, -5.18

      by zenbassoon on Thu May 09, 2013 at 08:21:21 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  Wonder if it was after "Please proceed" and mitt (0+ / 0-)

      just didn't want people to recall that little incident in debate.

      Because mitt is willing to go dirty and he did. He lied regularly and blatantly and shrugged it off when the press called him on it.
      He even told people in Ohio their auto jobs were being shipped to China and repeated it despite it being strongly refuted.

      He told outright lies about things Obama said and did. Heck Barbara Bush used restraint, not Mitt's campaign.
      I'm referring to the robo call she did for Mitt. The campaign released the script to Politico before the ad was out. She refused to include the part the part that said "America cannot survive four more years of Barack Obama." or include any attack on Obama

      Mostly I think anyone who will repeatedly and purposely lie through a campaign with no apology (Recall the "We Won’t  Let Our Campaign Be Dictated By Fact-Checkers’ response) is doing dirty campaigning

      Don't think it was morals that made him nix Benghazi attack ads. It was either not wanting reminders of looking like a fool or not wanting implied attack on Clinton when he was going for the 'Clinton good, Obama bad' theme.  
      The fool part wasn't just the debate flop but his initial reaction to the attack that was roundly bashed.

       

      •  Right, Romney was willing to say Obama... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        joynow

        ...never had a job in the private sector, which is a blatant lie, and also one step from calling Obama lazy & shiftless.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site