Tony Perkins announces evangelical support for Rick Santorum
posted at 2:30 pm on January 14, 2012 by Tina Korbe
At a major meeting in Texas this weekend, a group of 150 Christian leaders and conservative activists defied expectations and actually managed to coalesce around a single candidate.
Surrogates for Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich, Rick Perry, Ron Paul and Rick Santorum (no one for Jon Huntsman) made their pitches; the evangelicals considered them. On Saturday morning, they voted, and the Family Research Council’s Tony Perkins held a call to debrief the media. He saw white smoke.
“What I did not think was possible appears to be possible,” said Perkins. After three rounds of balloting, “there emerged a strong consensus around Rick Santorum as the preferred candidate of this room.” It was a “clear, clear majority.”
Without doubt, this will be a major morale boost for the Santorum campaign — and a blow to the Newt Gingrich and Rick Perry camps — but whether it can morph into something more remains to be seen. Before the meeting, experts doubted that the group of aging activists would be able to alter the race much at this point in the nominating process:
But does the group stand a chance of reshaping the race? There are reasons for doubt: many of the leaders convening in Texas are well past their primes, with declining influence, and the nominating contest is already pretty far along.
One candidate – Mitt Romney – has won the first two contests, in Iowa and New Hampshire, and the South Carolina primary comes just a week after the Texas meeting.
“Some of these evangelical leaders are not as active as they once were in politics and the evangelical movement has changed a little overtime,” says John Green, a political scientist from the University of Akron. “Where this group could have an effect is if they coalesced around one candidate and then helped to provide resources.”
Boots on the ground, phone lists, robocalls, and even the possibility of an evangelical super PAC could move the needle for a candidate, Green said. But the time for such resource-intensive mobilization is growing thin.
Now that the group has demonstrated its ability to do the improbable by coalescing around one guy, it seems possible that they could also do the practical and provide actual, tangible resources to Santorum’s campaign. Maybe they should all board the same plane for South Carolina, where Santorum is far behind in the polls. At the very least, they’ll begin to mobilize their own constituencies for Santorum.
The Christian leaders insist they didn’t meet to brainstorm a way to stop Mitt Romney. One said it was an “anti-Obama meeting,” while another said he’s more concerned to stop Ron Paul than Mitt Romney. It’s obvious they haven’t been overly enthusiastic about Romney’s likely nomination, but Perkins said they didn’t overly discuss the former Massachusetts governor — and that his Mormonism came up not once.
Still, it’s clear they didn’t choose Santorum on the basis of his conservative credentials alone. Perkins said they overlooked Rick Perry, for example, because, while they liked his record, they had concerns about his electability. Santorum’s strong showing in Iowa surely nudged the group in his direction.
Related Posts:









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »
I think once you get to 4 Pinncchios, the next level up is a bloody handed Gepetto. Especially when there’s a body count.
CitizenEgg on May 7, 2013 at 10:03 AM
Fmeh. Failing newspaper finds a nugget to try and salvage a few subscribers who aren’t brain-addled leftist dolts.
One halfhearted attempt to seem unbiased can’t atone for the slobbering sycophancy of the last 5 years. If you jackasses had done your job starting back in 2007 we wouldn’t be dealing with the coverup of 4 dead Americans today.
Bishop on May 7, 2013 at 10:06 AM
Great piece Ed
cmsinaz on May 7, 2013 at 10:07 AM
Who rewrote the Benghazi talking points?
Valerie Jarret.
ToddPA on May 7, 2013 at 10:08 AM
From Michael Ramirez’s pen to God’s ear…
Midas on May 7, 2013 at 10:10 AM
It was the “intelligence community”. Now move along.
forest on May 7, 2013 at 10:11 AM
“I am not a crook.”
Barack Hussein Obama
Khun Joe on May 7, 2013 at 10:11 AM
Still, it is clear Rice was simply mouthing the words given to her.
No, it’s not. She’s a mindless drone with no thoughts of her own? We have no idea what she knew at the time, and it’s more likely she knew the truth than not, so her crime against this nation borders on treason.
HopeHeFails on May 7, 2013 at 10:16 AM
Shame, nothing will be done about it. I gave up hope for any justice when cliton was in the whitehouse.
jsunrise on May 7, 2013 at 10:16 AM
No. Kessler would have given a Republican Pinnochios to an exponential level for this pack of lies. And nobody was buying that YouTube video excuse even as Rice was out there lying her ass off. The lies were further exposed this week and confirmed that it was the White House and not the IC that is at fault. But we already knew that.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 10:19 AM
Those people (especially the COM) should not have been there in the first place. Sec State is responsible for her people. If security was inadequate, her people should have been pulled out. Will anyone be held accountable?
SwabJockey on May 7, 2013 at 10:20 AM
The kenyan is a control freak (or his puppetmaster soros and jarret).
No way he did no do this or sign off on it.
However, expect some low level bureacrat to take the fall.
Expect the media to cover for 1/2 day then move on to important things like kardasian’s dog being ill.
acyl72 on May 7, 2013 at 10:21 AM
Who cares? Nothing will come of this dog and pony show. The MSM won’t allow it.
RedNewEnglander on May 7, 2013 at 10:22 AM
Also unexplained is why the UN Ambassador that would be acting as spokesdrone for the administration. Flacking for the administration on an embassy attack really isn’t part of her portfolio.
I honestly think she knowlingly lied her ass off about Benghazi with the promise that she would be the next Secretary of State.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 10:22 AM
And through all this, people keep forgetting to mention that filmmaker Nakoula is still in jail.
Dusty on May 7, 2013 at 10:27 AM
It used to be said that if Nixon had Clinton’s press, he would have finished his second term, and Spiro Agnew would have succeeded him. With Obama’s press, Senate, and ego, the chances of him being forced out of office are exactly zero.
TREGONSEE on May 7, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Actually, give credit to Greg Gutfeld of “Redeye” and “The Five”. He asked the question earlier and more often than most anyone else.
digitsiam on May 7, 2013 at 10:29 AM
Yep, me too. She was getting a payoff for lying for Obama. When the lying failed to work, so did her anticipated SoS nomination.
NJ Red on May 7, 2013 at 10:29 AM
That would be my guess.
ITguy on May 7, 2013 at 10:30 AM
The admin’s position is preposterous….are attacks being RSVP’d with start and end times??? Ludicrous why they didn’t allow any help, regardless of distance, to proceed until verified the assault was indeed over…and what’s saying it couldn’t resume for a 3rd round?…IMPEACH.
hillsoftx on May 7, 2013 at 10:32 AM
Valerie Jarret
That right there is the REAL Chicago thug. She makes the rest of them look like pikers.
NJ Red on May 7, 2013 at 10:32 AM
A witchhunt without witches. Imagine that !
Or maybe there are two of ‘em.
WTF. Why is a State Dept. Spokesperson telling the CIA what to write ?
OTH, she clearly points to Clinton’s involvement.
Jabberwock on May 7, 2013 at 10:34 AM
Yeah, all of this and…who ordered the stand down?
The cover-up began as soon as the first shots were fired. That would seem to make it part of a plan.
DanMan on May 7, 2013 at 10:34 AM
The REB’s brain Valerie Jarrett did it, and forget about getting her to testify. That’s never going to happen with the REB in the White House.
slickwillie2001 on May 7, 2013 at 10:36 AM
Well now.
We can toss in Jarret for a nice “three witches stew”
Jabberwock on May 7, 2013 at 10:37 AM
Wait, this can’t be…we were told after the 2nd presidential debate that Obama was upfront about it being terror. You don’t mean the media ran with admin talking points in an effort to defend Dear Leader and lied to us, do you?
changer1701 on May 7, 2013 at 10:39 AM
Oh, I don’t know about that. Agnew left office for corruption during his time in MD before he became VP. But yes, the rat-eared coward isn’t going anywhere.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 10:41 AM
And to preserve the Administration’s “evil movie” narrative – an amateur filmmaker still rots in a prison cell today.
Hill60 on May 7, 2013 at 10:41 AM
Axelrod & Plouffe? Who else?
Tater Salad on May 7, 2013 at 10:41 AM
That’s the real scandal. Why reduce security and rely on a hostile Islamic militia when every other foreigner is leaving the city and warning you.
Whether or not we could have the cavalry ride to the rescue is debatable. But reducing your security in an increasingly insecure area is not. Deliberate.
rbj on May 7, 2013 at 10:41 AM
Ramirez missed the obvious………….”I’m not a lying liar”.
Tater Salad on May 7, 2013 at 10:42 AM
I wouldn’t forget about Axelrod.
DDay on May 7, 2013 at 10:44 AM
The fat pig moderating the second debate made that claim as she was tag-teaming the debate against Romney. It wasn’t true. And the pig “conveniently” even had the transcript to brandish before the cameras in her pudgy rib-stained fingers.
But the rat-eared coward was still saying it was about a video weeks later. Just as he has never called the Boston Marathon bombing an act of terrorism.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM
If this gets very hot it will be interesting as operatives in the Democrat Party take sides – Clintonistas vs. Obamanots.
You will know the war is on when Carville starts making the circut pointing fingers.
Tater Salad on May 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM
I am sure that those who are guilty of the cover up; Obama, H Clinton, Susan Rice, etc. will take full responsibility for their actions provided there are no consequences to doing so.
Dasher on May 7, 2013 at 10:45 AM
I agree this is horrible and much worse than Watergate. But my question is – what laws were broken? Did anyone lie under oath? Just lying to the American people is not even remarkable in the most transparent administration ever.
sleepyhead on May 7, 2013 at 10:47 AM
exactly. The only thing you can take from all of this is what clinton said ” What difference does it make?”. This will come and go and their will be no difference after its all said and done. The complicit and corrupt media will make sure of it. The evening news will have a segment about the dying seals and everyone will think its sunny outside.
phatfawzi on May 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Valerie Jarrett… pay no attention to the woman behind the curtain…
Boudica on May 7, 2013 at 10:49 AM
Nothing will happen. It will get buried under the girls in Ohio who were rescued (a good thing, but it will become a total circus)… and the Jodie Arias verdict will be coming in… And Honey Boo Boo’s mom and dad got married… And in the end it will all be Bush’s fault anyway.
Boudica on May 7, 2013 at 10:52 AM
As much as I like the idea of Marine 1 whisking him away, I shutter at the thought of Uncle Joe being in charge.
yongoro on May 7, 2013 at 10:52 AM
This is impeachable, deplorable, and dereliction of duty at all levels. The big picture to me is the total disregard displayed for the Constitution and the American people. Our ancestors fought and died for freedom of speech and this bunch immediately began their attack on an
American movie with dire warnings that Allah can’t be mocked by Americans!! As usual Obama and his Communist Muslim friends have to be protected and America blamed!!The behavior is always the same; Ft Hood, Benghazi, Boston, Underwear guy, shoe bomber,etc. Obama’s default position is always to blame America, Republicans, Christians. the courts, business,…in other words The American Way of life! He is truly the enemy of this country and a disgrace as Commander-in-Chief! I am hopeful that this fraud will be revealed and Shillary jailed!!
Marco on May 7, 2013 at 10:53 AM
Nutstuyu on May 7, 2013 at 10:54 AM
Fawning acolyte troll yawns in 5…..4……3…….
itsspideyman on May 7, 2013 at 10:55 AM
The LSM complies and agrees completely with that recommendation.
hawkeye54 on May 7, 2013 at 10:56 AM
I can’t figure out the face on that cartoon. Ears, okay, but the rest is beyond me.
PattyJ on May 7, 2013 at 10:56 AM
And strangely, the best sniper in the world is no longer alive.
Nutstuyu on May 7, 2013 at 10:56 AM
Well if some idiot (illegal alien) college kid can get charged with “obstructing justice” for removing a laptop, I think an enterprising prosecutor should be able to come up with some “accessory” or “conspiracy” charges for Teh Won and Shillary.
Nutstuyu on May 7, 2013 at 10:58 AM
Um, I am going to go out of a very far, very thin limb and proffer:
TO ENSURE THAT BENGHAZI DID NOT DERAIL BARACK OBAMA’S RE-ELECTION.
Of course, only tinfoil-hatters would say such a thing because, as nobrain and Bray-am(ing at the Moon) have repeatedly said:
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 11:00 AM
I want categorical, sustained reminders to the American people from our side that Obama and Clinton danced on the graves of 4 brave Americans when they peddled the shopworn lie of an anti-Islamic video was to blame – right next to the flag-draped caskets.
Perhaps they should have kicked the caskets for good measure.
These are hateful, treasonous people.
matthew8787 on May 7, 2013 at 11:01 AM
Xcellent cartoon by Ramirez!
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:03 AM
But Obama told us that Obama made this point the day after the attack–and Candy Crowley backed him up.
/
BuckeyeSam on May 7, 2013 at 11:03 AM
I often wonder why this Administration has such a hard time grasping the realities of the world ahead of time, before things go bad. I know most liberals rely on lots of denial, seeing the world as they are convinced it should be instead of as it is, then trying to make the world conform to the demented ideal.
But these people running the country seem locked into their fantasies so tight they can almost be called ‘ultimate liberals’. What did they think would happen when we cut our security and our allies wisely cut and run? Did State think it would be really, really warm and fuzzy to show we ‘trust’ those who hate us, somehow believing we can win them as friends if we’re all ‘non-threatening’ and super-duper friendly? Maybe that’s why Obama went to bed: He likely thought, “It’ll blow over; they won’t get too violent.”
I think the talking points got scrambled in a mad dash to recover from a serious case of culture shock. The Administration didn’t see Benghazi coming (though she should have), and then didn’t know what to do with it; all their notions got blown out of the water in a few hours. Instead of owning up right away, their over-inflated egos made them think they could wiggle out of it.
I hope the sheer blindness, ineptitude, and full-blown liberalism of these people destroy their careers, and they take down as many more liberals, politicians, and bureaucrats as possible.
Liam on May 7, 2013 at 11:04 AM
Pretty easy to disregard the Constitution when a majority of American people are kept ignorant of what that document really contains. Decades of leftist indoctrination in schools, of which the Constitution is either misinterpreted deliberately or through the ignorance of those teaching or not taught at all to our own citizens as well as the of waves of immigrants already accustomed to socialism and corruption in government to see to that.
The Left hate the constraints imposed upon government by the U.S. Constitution.
hawkeye54 on May 7, 2013 at 11:05 AM
Well we can start with Abuse of power through intimidation of witnesses…and throw in Obstruction of Justice and Impeding an Official Investigation.
The whistleblowers state they were threatened with reprisals etc.
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM
Who says Joe has to be told?
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 11:09 AM
I’m looking forward to them defending their stance.
cozmo on May 7, 2013 at 11:11 AM
Incompetence has been the hallmark of this administration since Day One.
GarandFan on May 7, 2013 at 11:12 AM
What do his economic theories have to do with this?
davidk on May 7, 2013 at 11:13 AM
The country would be better off if we all knew what Jarret knows. It should be water board or Spock, the woman is total marxist evil.
tim c on May 7, 2013 at 11:14 AM
Thank you. That sounds like a good start.
sleepyhead on May 7, 2013 at 11:17 AM
Tuesday, about 6 AM, before the attack in Benghazi (all times Eastern): BLAMES VIDEO
Tuesday, about 6:30 PM, in Twitter message, U.S. Embassy stands by statement
Tuesday, 10:08 PM: Clinton Confirms Death of One American in Libya (BLAMES VIDEO)
Tuesday, 10:10 PM: Politico reports Obama Administration disavows Embassy Statement
Tuesday, 10:24 PM: Romney criticizes Administration’s response
Wednesday, 7:22 AM: President Confirms Death of the Ambassador and Three Others
Wednesday, 10:17 AM, ROMNEY’S FIRST PRESS CONFERENCE (for which he was roundly criticised):
That same day, President Obama filmed an interview with 60 Minutes to be aired on the following Sunday in which he said:
Knowing that Mitt Romney was receiving security briefings, as do all Presidential nominees of the two, major parties during the General Election, it is quite apparent that Romney was speaking the truth and Obama not so much…
Resist We Much on May 7, 2013 at 11:20 AM
I’m okay with Joke Biden as president. He’s no smarter than the REB, but without the malice and hatred of America.
slickwillie2001 on May 7, 2013 at 11:20 AM
Hearings are not enough, there has to be consequences to Obama and Hillary. Too bad Petreous was taken out of the picture with his scandal because I’m sure he knows lots, but his credibility is gone.
lea on May 7, 2013 at 11:24 AM
What did Obama know and when did he know it?
farsighted on May 7, 2013 at 11:25 AM
Griffin has asked a good question here. When does this ARB become available to the public in its entirety?
Rovin on May 7, 2013 at 11:26 AM
Judicial Watch
Patterico
Instapundit
Legal Insurrection
All great blogs that often cover legal issues thoughtfully.
I’m following Dershowitz too for the devil’s advocate argument as well….He’s a liberal of the old school but he’s smart and gives insight as to tactical difficulties/complexities of the arguments.
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM
dissent555 on May 7, 2013 at 11:28 AM
Biden could be fairly easy to manage after an Impeachment of Obama…But he would likely pardon Obama.
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:32 AM
If Slo-Joe does become POTUS does that mean we get San Fran Nan as VP. Yikes!!!!!!!!
D-fusit on May 7, 2013 at 11:33 AM
Who has the authority to order a stand down order. I know it’s a general but doesn’t the general have to talk to the President?
Conservative4ev on May 7, 2013 at 11:34 AM
Nah…Biden would have to hire a crew of food tasters & he knows it.
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:36 AM
This week, we will see whether the Leader of the Free World will throw his Former Secretary of State under his now world-famous bus, as he apparently did those 4 brave Americans on that horrible night of September 11, 2012.
It will not surprise anyone if he does.
Harry S. Truman had a plaque on his desk which read,
President Barack Hussein Obama has one on his desk, which reads,
kingsjester on May 7, 2013 at 11:36 AM
Secretary of Defense who answers to the President.
workingclass artist on May 7, 2013 at 11:37 AM
I see what you did there. Not a typo?
manyears on May 7, 2013 at 11:39 AM
This is all a bunch of bull$hit.
Candy Crowley told me.
BacaDog on May 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM
What a fine pair they’d make though. The world would take notice and tremble.
/s
hawkeye54 on May 7, 2013 at 11:40 AM
No, of course not, and not Boehner either. Joe picks a VP and sends him/her to the Senate for confirmation. He could pick Hillary though.
slickwillie2001 on May 7, 2013 at 11:41 AM
Tell me that cartoon head of the anointed one does not look like a penis about to enter a hairy vagina?
JLPicard on May 7, 2013 at 11:43 AM
More importantly: who pushed the tape?
AllahsNippleHair on May 7, 2013 at 11:44 AM
Via twitchy
WH COS passing out don’t report on Benghazi donuts
cmsinaz on May 7, 2013 at 11:46 AM
haha, dream on. some of you have completely lost touch with reality.
i know, i’m repeating myself.
sesquipedalian on May 7, 2013 at 11:47 AM
Shillery “What difference, at this point does it make” Clinton’s future ambitions are burning over an open flame starting tomorrow on Capitol Hill. Let it be so.
D-fusit on May 7, 2013 at 11:47 AM
It’s pretty clear to me that they weren’t living in lala land, but were actively arming the rebels in Lybia and beyond. The fantasy was the WH thinking they had bought the love of terrorists.
txhsmom on May 7, 2013 at 11:50 AM
Well, there ARE those 4 dead Americans…
And someone, somewhere in all the blizzard of paperwork got a *Official* notice to ‘stand down’.
An American citizen, regardless of his character or lack thereof was sent to jail over it….OTOH he wasn’t put on any official “Drone” list so there’s a plus.
Now, not sure what the chattering skulls at MSNBC or the other in the Media Knee-pad Brigade would want to name it, but so far, we have False testimony to Congress, Obstruction of Justice, and Lying Under Oath.
Nixon was forced from office for less (no deaths)…’Scooter’ Libby went to jail for WAY less (no deaths)…
I don’t expect, short of a videotape confession (maybe not even then) that Obama will take a hit on this: but dammit, the former SoS should. There is no reason she should get a pass over this.
But, in all likelihood, she will.
BlaxPac on May 7, 2013 at 11:50 AM
When both Obama and H.R. Clinton made a point of making it widely know that they were ‘in bed’ the night of the Benghazi attack I wondered why they would be so eager to point out that they were, essentially, absent without leave and derelict in their sworn duties. Surely, this was a political mistake, I thought.
Obama, in his capacity and role as Commander-In-Chief should certainly have been wide awake and working during an attack against our consulate, an attack which constituted an act of war against the sovereign soil of this nation.
H.R. Clinton, in her capacity as Secretary of State, having been responsible for both the presence of those State Department employees at Benghazi, and the lack of adequate security and observation of established protocols, not to mention well acquainted with Ambassador Stevens personally, should certainly have been wide awake and working to get those individuals under her dominion out of danger and home safely.
Yet, both Obama and H.R. Clinton went out of their way to make it clear that they were not wide awake and on the job while the Benghazi attack and the resultant deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador Stevens, was occurring.
I had thought that this was a mistake, as it was an open admission that neither Obama nor H.R. Clinton had fulfilled their sworn duty, and both had demonstrated, at the very least, a callous disregard for the lives and well being of Americans whom they, together, had put in harms way.
Now, however, the reasoning behind their shameful and startling admissions becomes clear. This is an effort to afford themselves Plausible Deniablility. They will simply claim they knew nothing of events as they unfolded because they were in bed asleep and claim that no one notified them that Americans were dying under their command.
Plausible Deniability is a term the world became all too familiar with in the Nixon era relating to the Watergate coverup and scandal. However, there is an overrideing distinction between the plausible deniability pursued by the Nixon co-conspirators and the plausible deniability being sought by Obama and H.R. Clinton. No one died as a result of Nixon’s coverup of wiretapping the competition at the Watergate Hotel. Nixon didn’t order Americans into harms way, undermine the security to which they were entitled, and then turn his back in a blatant act of desertion as they were slaughtered by a group of people affiliated with and acting with at least three of the four KNOWN al quaeda operatives in the same nation in which he’d just armed rebels to overthrow the government of that nation.
Ultimately, Nixon resigned over his attempt to provide cover for those involved in wiretapping the competition at the Watergate Hotel. You can likely safely bet your life that H.R. Clinton and Barack H. Obama will not resign over the death’s of four Americans put into harms way by their will, lost to an act of blatant desertion, and deliberately lying about the cause of that attack which cost those lives, all to save themselves embarrassment before a national election.
thatsafactjack on May 7, 2013 at 11:56 AM
All true.
But tough to pack into a sound bite for low info “what me worry?” voters.
farsighted on May 7, 2013 at 12:03 PM
Because Hillary–or was it Barak?–ran her department with a belief that she had “smart power”. It makes America immune to bad guys.
You don’t understand the genius of the Choom-headed One. This entire Administration is all about “What difference does it make?” even while they try to steal your liberty in an effort to “Make a difference!”
It wasn’t his fault. Because the attackers didn’t give Baraky enough time to “sleep on” his decision, he was incapable of making one.
America’s Rapid Response capability {and training} are wasted when such a slow-footed non-decision-maker is clogging up the Command structure.
Hey, Baraky! It sure is easy to criticize the quick decisions of a trained fighter pilot named Bush when you are nothing more than a highly-skilled couch potato named Obama, huh?
My favorite nickname for him, “Jackass-in-Chief” is too polite. The people who serve their country in harm’s way must know their country has their back–and is worth serving. This clown makes us all wonder.
rwenger43 on May 7, 2013 at 12:12 PM
They need to play the “What difference” clip over and over again. It’s offensive enough as a comment but combined with that Clintonian mix of lecturing, moral outrage, anger that anyone dare question, and schreeching is like nails on a chalkboard.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 12:17 PM
I’m thinking a re-creation of the events using sock puppets.
Happy Nomad on May 7, 2013 at 12:18 PM
Hard to take anyone seriously when they don’t understand punctuation.
itsspideyman on May 7, 2013 at 12:20 PM
Obama will throw Hillary under the bus.
He needs Deval, or such, as a front man.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 12:21 PM
Your glee is your dope.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 12:22 PM
It was that “Innocence of Muslims” video guy who rewrote the talking points.
That’s why he’s in jail, right?
profitsbeard on May 7, 2013 at 12:24 PM
Benghazi is already off of all the TV stations, incl. Faux.
The Cleveland kidnappint and sexual abuse, by 3 burly Asian guys, and the Syrian aid, based on yesterday’s Oaf in Chief golf outing with Corker/Chambliss have taken over the news.
Hillary will still be thrown under the bus by Obama.
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 12:26 PM
kidnapping
Schadenfreude on May 7, 2013 at 12:27 PM
hard to take criticism seriously from someone who doesn’t know the difference between punctuation and capitalization.
sesquipedalian on May 7, 2013 at 12:27 PM
In one of the Horatio Hornblower stories, the Acting Captain of a British ship was captured in his bunk while his ship was being taken by escaped prisoners.
His ship had to be re-captured by underlings operating outside of the command structure at great loss of life.
His enemies and peers all mocked the Acting Captain openly after the fact. His men were embarrassed for him and tried not to hate him, because once he was freed they still had to serve under him until he could be formally relieved of command.
Nevertheless, he went to his grave feeling justified in having gone to bed, because if his underlings had done their duties correctly, “nothing would have happened.”
The burden of responsibility requires acknowledgement of it, not the ability to blame subordinates. Barak is lazy. And other people pay the price for his sloth.
rwenger43 on May 7, 2013 at 12:28 PM
Savages
No I’m not talking about the Oliver Stone anti-Latino movie on cable this week.
I want a vote on what would be just if the facts are as they appear:
1) President Obama admits that a Muslim leader called him with the worry that a major problem would develop due to the movie knocking Islam and he was so scared that he didn’t even want to risk one more rifle raised that night by an American in a ME nation. So he just went numb and went to rest to go to Las Vegas. He is so sorry and it will not happen again. Please remember that he got Bin Laden!
2) The stonewall continues and several top aides admit the mess on the information chain and will “end” their careers as super grades to become lobbyists for a while and try to keep up the payments on the two multi-million dollar they bought while gov’t employees homes in God know what way.
3) Jesus Christ himself (or a reactionary leader) brings a force which exactly replicates the Benghazi siege with the White house as a target and people trapped inside. The Supreme Court orders the Secret Service and Marine guards to stand down for an unclear reason while the wild savages totally destroy the place and the President suffers exactly the same fate as the Ambassador. What is left of him is taken to hospital the next day and dropped off. The fires even resemble the tragedy and classified stuff flies everywhere like trash. Apparently Jesus didn’t take all the Christian bashing as well as we thought He would.
4) The truth proves as rare and slick as a unicorn covered in frozen nitrogen and we have endless hearings which completely stop the law making process until 2016. Life goes on and nobody else suffers horribly and we act like good Christians about the whole thing.
IlikedAUH2O on May 7, 2013 at 12:29 PM
JLPicard on May 7, 2013 at 11:43 AM
I would argue it’s the nether end of his “down low” brother!
wolfplus3 on May 7, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Bagdad Bob wrote them!
kregg on May 7, 2013 at 12:34 PM
Comment pages: 1 2 3 Next »