osewalrus (osewalrus) wrote,
osewalrus
osewalrus

I simply do not understand the Benghazi Argument, Or The Binders Thing

I am having problems understanding this whole "it took 14 days to call it a terrorist attack" thing and why that should be devastating. I understand why "you ignored the security risks" is an argument (whether or not I agree, given the demands on resources and the nature of threat assessment, I at least understand what the argument is). But under what theory is it bad to assess what happened and only call it a terrorist attack when evidence is confirmed?

And yes, I get that Obama said "act of terror" the next day, so even the factual predicate is questionable. But I'm even more puzzled by why -- even if it were correct -- it would be some kind of amazing failure or conspiracy.

As long as I am out of touch, I just don't get why "binders of women" is such a catchy meme/gaffe. It's pretty clear what Romney was trying to say. Again, whatever one may think of the factual predicate, or if Romney followed through after he began to position himself as a Presidential candidate, I'm clearly not getting why "binders full of women" trips the meme meter as it has.
Subscribe

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    Help
  • 22 comments