Hillary who?

Will you pay for that with a special sales tax for residents of Woodbridge?

Jack Kenny, The republicans in the Virginia Assembly have passed increasingly repressive laws about women, gays, and minorities. If Cuccinelli were to win, he'll send women and gays back to the dark ages. I agree that Virginia is good for business, but terrible at social issues. Warner is not an Obama clone, he was a fine governor, a great senator, and would be good in any position he holds.

I agree with Carol. The GOP has been all about heavy handed repressive social policies targeting women & gays. Cuccinelli is even worse. McDonnell ran on improving transportation, and he hasn't even tried to send NOVA money for that. Our roads & highways are falling apart. The GOP is all about putting women back in the kitchen & gays back in the closet. If they had their way, minorities wouldn't be allowed to vote, either, because the GOP now knows they can't win with their whites only strategy.

Carol and Sandra, this is why what we really need is a more libertarian government. The republican party's social policies are a bit worrisome and the democrat's business sense is lacking.

Jack, surely you jest: GOP = "sane approach to financing the Silver Line Phase 2"?? What a joke!!! There is NO sane approach now nor has there ever been from EITHER side of the aisle. There never was a plan which is THE problem. Who sets the ball rolling on a huge infrastructure project with no rational, viable financing plan? Incumbents all should be ashamed of the burden they have foisted on their constituents with this debacle.

High tolls will kill the golden goose and lay waste to the DTR corridor. Are you sure you are a member of this community?

If so, what rock have you been hiding under?

Unfortunately Warner is more like a Republican that an Obama clone.

What sane approach to financing the Silver Line - an unfair typical Republican approach.

Warner, the republicrat, was good for business - his friends and associates.

Tim Kaine gave the Dulles Toll Road to MWAA, and appointed a couple of members to the MWAA Board that we remember so... fondly. Didn't one of those Kaine appointee Board members co-chair MWAA's Audit Committee, that held its meetings in secret session for years? Shame.

And didn't this region really weather the recession better than other regions because of the huge amount of federal spending here, that was unaffected by economic conditions and had nothing to do with Tim Kaine? I thought people knew about that. And now, federal spending is about to drop like a rock - at the same time that the double cost of the Kaine's Folly rail line will smash this region worse than a super hurricane. Virginia should definitely reconsider its mistaken selection of Mr. Kaine as one of its Senators.

But Bob, how do you expect Virginia to "reconsider its mistaken selection of Mr. Kaine as one of its Senators?" We aren't going to have another election. And I don't think people "mistakenly" voted for him. They just disagree with your viewpoint. Not candidate is perfect, but I think Kaine has done right by Virginia in a variety of areas (Metro is not the only topic), and his message obviously resonated with the voters.

Barbara, the people of Northern Virginia are only now beginning to realize what some of us were warning them about, regarding Kaine's Folly - the Dulles Rail / Silver Line. I figure that most people will wake up suddenly when the Dulles Toll Road situation hits the wall, which should happen some time around 2015. After that, there will be a few years of the usual back and forth blame games full of disinformation, and that will confuse a lot of people. But by Kaine's next Senatorial election in 2018 , a whole lot of people will know what he did to them by handing this job to MWAA with his appointees on the Board there, and setting up the Toll Road as the cash cow. Kaine's only hope is to be the main Senator who really forces the Silver Line price down to earth and arranges a financing system that actually works, but I doubt he can do that.

Don- this is a very interesting insight which I haven't thought of. I can truly understand why he might want to leave the frustration of the Senate behind him. If he does choose to run he will be missed in the Senate. I truly believe that one of the great things that Virginia did was not allow our governors to run in consecutive terms. It seems to lead to real governing rather than campaigning and electioneering. My fear for the Senate will be whether we will have a sane voice who will have the respect of others replace him.

First. you should learn what the word "socialist" means. It does not mean anything you do not like.

As to supporters of Obama and Kaine, your facts are incorrect. Both Obama and Kaine did particularly well in Virginia's wealthiest counties. So unless you think that the wealthy did not vote, which they did, your comment is just silly. As one of those who pays for your benefits, I voted for both Obama and Kaine, because I want my offspring to have a brighter future than the alternative would have brought about.

Sour grapes always sounds exactly like what it is.

You are correct, I should have made that more clear -- the winner(s) of the primary/ primaries will face each other.

The sad thing is that the Republicans have chosen one of the least democratic ways of selecting their nominee-- A convention. It effectively silences any independent in the electorate from having a real choice. It is ashame that Ken Cuccinelli feels his only chance for getting a nomination is through a closed convention rather than an open primary.

The question is more whether the Democrats will get behind their candidate. Creigh Deeds wasn't so much too extreme as just plain uninspiring. Fairfax County had 81 percent turnout in 2012 and about 40 percent turnout in 2009 -- that's the difference. Obama and Kaine can organize people. Deeds couldn't. Warner can. I'm not sure about Terry M.

Bob McDonnell is a liar. He ran on a platform that specifically stated he would send more transportation dollars from Richmond to the NOVA area. So far I have seen NOTHING from him regarding this. I refuse to vote for another Republican candidate, as all I have seen from them is their ridiculously repressive anti-women, anti-gay, anti-minority social policies.

OT, McDonnell is known as Governor Ultrasound. Do you think the majority of women in Virginia would support him? He's not as bad as Cuccinelli - I agree with you that he scares the crap out of me too - but he's just as determined to send women and gays back to the dark ages.

You forgot me, Joe. I'm happy to join these people. Maybe you could concentrate on what you're thankful for instead of name calling.

Joe,

Happy Thanksgiving to you and your family. :-)

The "Adolph" award.........really?

The "Adolph Award" really - is Patch letting you get away with more nasty writing again KEL? It seems to me you should be getting the "Queen B" award for the year for only being able to understand your own point of view and for constantly trying to distort the point of view of others. You've never once represented any of our views correctly, but again that was deliberate. Ridicule and deceive! Actually it should be RD & D because distort is a big part of your musings. You Go Girl! You should be proud of yourself! My only consolation is that not only did I get your goat but I obviously got under your skin because you can't seem to shake me! Maybe you need to concentrate on happier things like - it's the holidays and your candidate won, so why are you so bitter!

To Deborah Kelly,

Back from the dead; I may have to reconsider you for honorable mention for the Adolf award. I thought that you had been banished like your deposed cretin cellmate Don A. Joy but alas you have only been censored and have risen again! The Fatherland would be proud. Do you actually have something to contribute to this thread or are you just out to reprise your racist rants and Axis thoughts again? It is a fait accompli as to what you stand for. Why don't you do us all a favor and just slink back under your rock if you don't have anything of substance to contribute to this discourse.

I agree Jody! It seems just because we disagree with KEL we are somehow racists - more distortion. Okay KEL - you are the true racist for calling everyone who disagrees with you a racist! Oh, and all Democrats and liberals are racists - does that make sense to you? I also agree with Carol that for those whose candidate won the election there is such a thing as being a gracious winner - Lots to learn KEL - you've got time to grow up! Remember it is the holidays and your candidate did win - not really a time for you to be bitter - you should be happy!

KEL, give it a rest. You are getting to be as bad as Don Joy. Please, enough of the name calling and hateful rhetoric. It gets us nowhere.

Thanks, Carol. Enjoy your Thanksgiving!

I don't know where you got that notion KEL! To me diversity should be about everyone having the same rights under the law and all living how they want to live and all of us trying to get along with each other. I don't have a problem with that whatsoever. I have a problem with our country being invaded by hispanics in such numbers that they feel they can retain their language and culture indefinitely, are adding unaffordable economic costs to our economy, and disrupting American neighborhoods and culture. There is no racist aspect to wanting foreigners to respect the law and for wanting to retain our right to control our immigration. Anyone can be a conservative; everyone is welcome! Liberal rhetoric is toxic and divisive, and no one more divisive than Obama. Anyone who disagrees with the left is labelled a racist. Free speech is going down the tubes, even at colleges.

Nice recap of my comments & I stand by every word, but it doesn't show my "hatred of the brown race" as you put it. Seems no one can discuss immigration or the effects illegal immigration has had and is having on our country without being called a racist in this thought police liberal society that has been pushed down our throats. That's why you won the Lack of Diversity of Thought award. I don't care if you like what I think; but you don't even think I should be allowed to express my opinions. The truth is that hispanics have been breaking the law coming here illegally en masse for a solid thirty years and know that we eventually reward them with citizenship. This is a problem. This isn't "diversity," this is taking over another country without firing a shot. You think I'm lacking in respect? They lack respect for our laws. I guess it's easier to label and discount conservatives than it is to have a real discussion of the issues.

We are either Americans or just a bunch of people living in the same country. Texas fought battles for their independence from Mexico. Actually, US citizens moved into Texas illegally,surpassed the Mexicans population wise and fought to take it over. After we won those battles, we fought the Mexican-American war to retain Texas and after winning that we bought the rest of the Spanish territories that are not part of the US. Did these wars mean anything? Does the rhetoric of LaRaza and popular Mexican authors expressing the view that they should (and will) take over the US by population growth and then break away into their own country bother anyone? Reminds me of a civil war we fought where over a half a million people died. I don't want to willingly hand our country over to anyone, even our own native American tribes.

Nice recap of my comments & I stand by every word, but it doesn't show my "hatred of the brown race" as you put it. Seems no one can discuss immigration or the effects illegal immigration has had and is having on our country without being called a racist in this thought police liberal society that has been pushed down our throats. That's why you won the Lack of Diversity of Thought award. I don't care if you like what I think; but you don't even think I should be allowed to express my opinions. The truth is that hispanics have been breaking the law coming here illegally en masse for a solid thirty years and know that we eventually reward them with citizenship. This is a problem. This isn't "diversity," this is taking over another country without firing a shot. You think I'm lacking in respect? They lack respect for our laws. I guess it's easier to label and discount conservatives than it is to have a real discussion of the issues.

I understand, Kel, and I wish your party would change. We need two healthy political parties in this country. However, name calling doesn't bring about change. It's childish and misdirected. I've been very disappointed at the way people attack each other on Patch instead of having an adult, open, honest, but respectful conversation.

To Jody:
In your own words: "I have a problem with our country being invaded by hispanics in such numbers that they feel they can retain their language and culture indefinitely, are adding unaffordable economic costs to our economy, and disrupting American neighborhoods and culture."

Also from Jody...
11:45 am on Wednesday, November 7, 2012
This is a very sad day for America. Hispanics that shouldn't even be here are deciding the election.

Also from Jody...
7:56 pm on Friday, November 9, 2012
I can't imagine a child in Fairfax County who would be comfortable enough to state in school that diversity creates problems we have to deal with and makes it harder to be unified as a country. They would probably be expelled for not swallowing the party line. I think this hyper-focus on diversity is detrimental.

To Jody...
Two points. First many Hispanics have been residents in this country for many generations more than your white bread forefathers. Bottom line is get used to it. Even Newt, Jindal, Jeb and the rest of the GOP are ready to strike a deal on immigration. Even w/o more immigration, whites will lose about 2 percent and minorities will gain 2 percent in the next 4 years making the numbers game even harder for Retropubs in 2016 given their quite obvious display of hatred of minorities. Your leaders aren't stupid; you'll have to accept more respect for Hispanics by the GOP in the future.

Oh, great. "White bread." This is just what we need. Here comes "Oh, but I was just making a point. Etc."

Who scripts this stuff?

To Jody:

Third point:
Unless you are a full-blooded American Indian you don't have any real claim on this country either. Many Mexican-Americans (you seem to lump everyone 'flooding the borders' as Hispanic but I believe that you are referring mainly to those people who come immediately from south of the Mexican border) as a group, have both Native American and European ancestors. I would hazard to say that a high percentage of Mexican Americans have more Native American blood in them and probably more than you or me for that matter so one could make the case that they are actually more entitled to this land than 'we' are.

Fourth point: Until Congress writes and passes a law that restricts U.S. companies from hiring 'illegals' and assesses and collects reasonable fines and the economy is better here than down there, short of arming drones to shoot them while they cross, they will continue to come here.

Fifth point: Jody, you are doing a great job digging and digging deeper and deeper. Your racism and hatred for anyone that doesn’t look like you has a lot of fellow racist proponents in this part of the country riled up and just salivating to take action. Rather than try to find ways to live with people that are different you prefer that we go the way of the Brits v. the Irish in N. Ireland or like Hamas v. Israelis or the Serbs v. the Croatians or the French v. the Huguenots, the Axis Germans v. anyone of Jewish heritage, the Ottoman Turks v. the Armenians, etc., etc., etc. Why don’t you tell us your final solution is for all of the brown people who happen to be in this country at the moment? Be honest and tell us what you would really do.

Kel, re your comments to Jody, while I disagree with many of her views, I don't think it's right for you to call her a racist. In so doing, you turn off all possibility of discussion. No one wants to be thought of as a racist. I wish we had a different word for it. The only time I agreed with Don Joy on Patch was when he said we are all a bit racist. He's right; we live in a racist society unfortunately. We all have our biases.
Jody, I disagree that "anyone" who disagrees with the left is called a racist. You are free to disagree with me anytime and I won't call you a racist just because you disagree. I do feel you have problems with diversity - we had a discussion of what FCPS are teaching in that regard. It would help if we all put ourselves in others' shoes for awhile, and consider what life would be like if we were the "other." And I disagree that Obama is divisive; it is the reaction to him, mainly coming from the right, that is divisive.

Well put James! The partisan voting is a sorry excuse for any elected offical. All this nincompoop got was that you left out faux news, good lord!

Kel and Joe, "Fox, CNN, and MSNBC" is what I wrote there :)

My family spends time watching ALL the major news outlets. We always watch CBS and NBC evening news. It is interesting that neither of these spent much time on Fast and Furious--even though CBS was the network that first broke the story. Like it or not, it is a story that should have been reported far more than it was.

Benghazi issues were largely ignored by the networks after the initial events. I watched the CSpan hearings and they were hardly touched by the networks, even though some of the testimony was explosive. (For example, the State Department really screwed up BEFORE the events.) Fox was the only network that investigated this. Could it be because of the elections?
Catherine Herridge and Jennifer Griffin on Fox are two very persistent reporters on National Security issues.
CBS must have reported on Romney's 47% gaffe nightly for almost a month--maybe more. Is that really "news"? Yet they hardly touched Benghazi before the election.
Sure, Fox is slanted--but the others are all slanted the other way.
Have you ever watched Soledad O'brien on CNN or Chris Matthews and Laurence O'Donnell or Ed Schultz on NBCNEWS?
Have you seen NBCNews commentators talking about Susan Rice and racism? It appears that if you criticize an African American woman that you are a racist and a misogynist--unless you are a liberal criticizing Condaleeza Rice rather than Susan Rice.
And, by the way, everyone should read liberal Dana Milbank on Susan Rice. He is not a fan.

To Kathy Keith:

BTW, Dana Milbank is not a liberal if you take him at his word on his past voting record.

I have considered that possibility. However, omitting facts is one thing--making them up is another!
To blame the assasination on a "protest" gone out of control caused by a video defies common sense when there was no protest--therefore the video was not the cause. Rice doubled down on this story repeatedly.
Question is: if Rice was going on these "talking points" when CIA, White House, and State now all say they knew that it was terrorism right away--why was she given those "talking points"? She could have just said that it was under investigation.

Question 2: If you were sent out to talk --don't you have some responsibility for what you are saying? I certainly did not believe it was a video.

The are all infotainment, just remember the Casey Anthony coverage on ALL of the time, or some L. Lohan nonsense being the top story. It's bad when stuff like that is made the top story, before they talk about our credit rating going down, international news, or the wars we are involved in.

Montel Williams does a great job at calling it out when Heath Ledger passed away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co3Spcq6Uzs

Remember when there was news on fox (our local affiliate, not fnc) and after that news there was that tabloid show "Current Affair"? Now, it is all mixed into this nonsense is infotainment.

Say what you will about drudge, my absolute favorite thing about his site is not necessarily what is posted at the top, but if you scroll down the the bottom of the page he has all of these wonderful news source links that A-Z link is huge, and many of those sites are bookmarks I have had for years. I am thankful for some of the things independent and internet news sources are doing out there these days.

I think it was cell or car phones? He endeared himself to me and many other moms when he spoke at my son's college graduation and his word of advice to the graduates was "Call your mother!"

Carol,

Mark Warner "won the lottery". He timed it just right and submitted a flood of applications for FCC rights for cell phone coverage and several landed and made him a multi-millionaire.

KEL,
I've always faught (as you put it) for the sanity of the Republican Party yet I've never once read anything you've said that's indicated you have any connection to the Republican Party - you bash it every time you get a chance. You throw crap at everyone who disagrees with you hoping something will stick? - boy does that sound familiar. I'm the one who kept pointing out that your candidate is half white, so which half am I against or am I just against people of mixed race - I guess you'll decide for me, as usual. While the Republican Party may not be perfect, I do think we need a two party system and you would be foolish to think the Democratic Party is anywhere near perfect. That's nothing to get angry over, if you want to see the Republican Party change then then go to some of your local committee meetings and make positive suggestions. Ranting and screaming and calling everyone a bible thumper or a racist not only is extremely innacurate but, it doesn't solve anything and generally just gets ignored. There is no perfect party and yet Congress as a whole still needs to work hard to make sure the country (everyone) is properly represented. 47% or whatever it was, is slightly less than half the country - that's how many people didn't want the outcome they received in the election. These people still need to be represented, not told to sit down and shut up and that they are racists for not agreeing with everything the Obama Administration has done or is doing.

Well, KEL, you won't bring it back together by name calling and hurling insults at them. That puts you on their level. Take the high road and root for people like Huntsman and Lugar. You certainly do need to mend your party, but you and Deborah and Jody go about it the wrong way. None of you will solve anything doing what you are all doing on Patch. Take it outside. We've gone far afield of the original question on Mark Warner.

Deborah, Obama was the first one to say on election night that he has heard the voices of those that didn't elect him. The 47% you allude to was originally Romney's comment about Obama voters, that included the elderly, the poor, and veterans. I didn't vote for Bush but I accepted him as my president. Many in your party don't want to accept Obama as legitimate and that is largely based in racist attitudes. I'm not calling you a racist, but I am saying that those who strove to de-legitimize him acted out of racism, calling him a Muslim,not born in the US, lazy, undeserving of his college achievements, etc. I've never seen such hatred directed toward a president.
At any rate, neither Obama nor anyone in his administration has told you to shut up and sit down. No one has said the Democratic party is perfect. At least I haven't. KEL is a republican, BTW. Lastly, you have done your share of name calling on Patch. It's time you all stop and make suggestions as to how we can come together for the good of the country. You don't have to like or agree with everything Obama has done or is doing, but he is the president. Your side is amply represented in Congress. Fear not.

Carol,
When I mentioned the the 47% or whatever it was (it may have been 48% or 49%) I was referring to the Americans who didn't vote for the President. I believe Obama had about 51%. I'm sorry I thought I was clear on that. I didn't mean to confuse the 47% that Romney referred to that caused such a stir. In an effort to work with both sides I do feel Sen. McCain should be able to hold an investigation and speak his mind without everyone calling him a racist - his comments have nothing to do with Susan's race - such a lame copout. I'm hoping for the best and hoping that Obama proves me wrong and does a grand job in his second term! I want to see Americans employed and the deficit go down and we all must see an end to ridiculous out-of-control spending. We need America to be strong and we need politicians to get us to a balanced budget. And to keep on topic - I'm not a fan of Mark Warner and I'm glad he's decided to not run for Governor.

Deborah, in any election, someone gets the majority and those who don't just have to live with it and make the best of it. I believe that Sen McConnell sought to do in Obama by defeating every initiative of his at every term. We elect people to Congress to serve the people, not to serve the aims of the next presidential candidate. As for John McCain, he missed the briefing that the Senators got on the Benghazi situation so he could give a press conference to blast Susan Rice. As I said before, we are too quick to call people racist, but I do think McCain has an agenda where she is concerned. By all means have an investigation and let him ask the questions. But he seems hell-bent on accusing her of all sorts of things and refuses to admit that she read from talking points she got from the CIA. I think his attack is a bit over the line. Is it racist? Only he knows.
Re spending, it has actually gone down under Obama. I agree we need a balanced budget but it shouldn't be balanced on the backs of the middle class when there are gazillionaires out there who could be paying more taxes, and when corporate welfare is rampant. And if we need to spend money to help the poor, the sick, and the most vulnerable among us, then spend away. There are desperate people out there who need help and the charities can only do so much.

Yes Carol,
We've established in any election someone wins and someone loses and everyone lives with whatever comes from it. As far as John McCain is concerned I do not believe he has any agenda towards Susan Rice or that he is a racist or that he thinks little of women. Susan Rice is just the beginning of his investigation. Her story (whether it was all she knew or not) is really not even the issue, In her position she should have known what was going on, but that's not even the issue. The real investigation seeks to find out why there wasn't adequate security and protection for the Americans at the Embassy, and if the Administration felt they couldn't provide the necessary security then why weren't these Americans pulled out of the Embassy and out of harms way. The point has already been established that there were many many forewarnings in previous months, along with direct communication from the Ambassador himself saying (in a nutshell) that things had gotten out of control and it wasn't safe there anymore, asking for additional security and stating that he felt the Libyan security there had been infiltrated. He cited people coming into the Embassy taking many pictures, etc. Now all that mess is one issue. Issue number two is why weren't these brave Americans (you know the ones being murdered in real time, even according to your news stations) given help when they were begging for help. The President said the buck stops at his desk. The truth will come out.

Deborah, as for Susan Rice, I still don't see how she should have known what was going on in spite of information she got from the intelligence community. She was asked to be on Sunday TV and given her talking points. She's the messenger. I think McCain's attacks on her intelligence and capability are over the line. She may have gotten it wrong but she's not stupid, and when capable people are attacked on that score, I believe some bit of racism is involved. McCain has his points but he's made it personal and that's what I have a problem with.
I agree with you that something went horribly wrong, that people who asked for help didn't get it (although Congress bears some responsibility for that), and those people died who shouldn't have. As for it appearing on "my" news I thought TV news was for everyone and everyone was free to watch what they wanted. Be that as it may, Deborah, I enjoy having a calm and reasoned conversation with you. We both want what's good for the country; we differ on how to get there.

According to Senator Ayotte (who spoke with Amb. Rice today), Amb. Rice did have access to the Daily Intelligence Briefing and DID know that there was an Al Queda connection when she spoke on TV. So, why did she insist on the protest of a video (which did not occur) causing the spontaneous outbreak of violence? From what I heard Ayotte say, Rice said that it was because the information was classified.

Problem is--it is okay to keep information from the American people if there is a security risk--but it is not okay to make stuff up. Big difference. She could have just stayed with the "under investigation" story--but she didn't. The question is "why"? And, who made the decision.
It appears that her story is now changing.

Can't help but wonder if it is because the week before the President had insisted that al Queda was on its heels.

It's dismaying that some otherwise intelligent-sounding people are claiming that attacks on Susan Rice are motivated, at least in part, by racism. Let's get serious here. Ms. Rice went on TV and told a humdinger of an untruth, repeatedly. Any competent government needs to get to the bottom of why one of the country's top foreign policy officials got the issue so wrong, repeatedly and publicly, especially as this individual is apparently being primed for a promotion to the State Department. And if you still insist on hiding behind the racist canard, then I will pull it out on those who have criticized Condi Rice. Fair, no?

Chuck and others, this is my point about the attacks on Susan Rice. There is much to be investigated about these horrible attacks - we were unprepared and people died. But McCain, Graham, and Ayotte are going after the wrong person. They should be talking to Hillary Clinton and the head of the National Security Council. The NSC developed the talking points and distributed them to members of the administration and to Congress so the Senators had them before Rice even went on TV, and they haven't claimed that she said anything different from what they were given. She talked from those points. I disagree that as Ambassador to the UN she should have known better! She would no more know what was going on in Bengazi that the Ambassador to Sweden would. Also, she could hardly be given those points, and then go on TV ad say "here is what the NSC said but I think it's not true." She didn't cause the attack but the Senators act like it. They are, I think going after her to get Obama and their charges are over the top and they are beginning to be a bit ridiculous.

The numbers imply 12 million if you divide 285 billion by the current cost of 23 thousand I thought that was clearly stated. My idea is a part of the solution. Give the illegals 6 months to sign up for the program and a opportunity to choose their departure date. Tighten border controls and smuggling detections, if they do not sign up then when they get caught they get deported with no money. My way saves almost 75% of the deportation costs.

It's about thirty years too late, it doesn't address the anchor baby issue, we will still have a glut of low-skill workers depressing wages, we'll still have the high costs for education, social services, health care etc., our culture is disrupted, and it gives eventual amnesty to millions of people who shouldn't be here. Other than that, it sounds lovely.

Deborah and Kathy Rice does have credibility with other nations - she's the UN ambassador and has done amazing things there, including negotiating with China. She was asked to be the spokesperson, how would she see that as "being used." Again...they are going after the wrong person, they are aiming at the messenger rather than addressing the substantive problems, and it is for political gain, whether to embarrass Obama or finagle a way for Kerry to be Sec of State. Why don't we all wait till Hillary Clinton completes her investigation in the state dept and reports to the senate before we make a final judgement on Susan Rice.

Not sharing information is one thing--making it up out of whole cloth is another.
There was no protest in Benghazi. Amb. Rice did not have to go on TV. She could have just said that she didn't know.
Hussein did not allow inspection. He had used WMD on his own people. Those are facts.
Question: If the American people question her honesty--how can the rest of the world trust her as Secretary of State?

Kathy, please don't include me and millions of other among those who question Amb Rice's honesty. The ones who seem to are the three senators who interviewed her. She didn't have to meet with them and they could have asked all the questions they wanted until they were satisfied. It wasn't too off base to think the Benghazi attack started with a protest, as there had been protests in Egypt and other places in the region. She didn't make it up, she did what she was asked to do. As for Saddam, as I recall he did let inspectors in and they didn't find anything.
I withdraw my charge that McCain's attack may be in part motivated by racism. But I do think it is political rather than substantive. Some say he wants to create an environment wherein Amb Rice would not be appointed Sec of state and John Kerry would, thereby leaving a vacancy in the Senate seat for Mass. If it seems far fetched, stranger things have happened.
I am hearing Joe Scarborough in the other room now and he's saying that McCain et all don't make any sense substantively. He's a conservative.

I agree that in her position Susan Rice needs to project honesty in order to have credibility with other nations. I agree she could have said she didn't know anything but I feel she was doing the job she was told to do - go on 5 news stations and tell this "story" to the American people. She was used as the puppet messenger and I feel most likely knew she was being used or should have. Her position would have required her to attend those briefings that relayed the real information. I still feel we need to move beyond the cover up story and focus on the meat and potatoes - all signs indicated an well organized attack with massive weaponry - nothing resembling a protest. And again, all the many many forewarnings in previous months. The Ambassador himself relayed the information back to Washington that he felt the Libyan security detail at the Embassy had been infiltrated and that people were coming in and taking pictures of the inside of the Embassy. He asked for more security. Based upon the many forwarnings and the Ambassador's assessment that the Libyan detail showed problems then why weren't these Americans pulled out of the Embassy and out of harm's way. Either vamp up security or pull them out. If we feel we can't adequately provide the protection they need then we pull them out. Now the BIGGIE, who squashed giving them assistance when their murders were being watched in real time and they were crying out for help? Military experts say there were many options!

Joe, as I recall, most everyone went along with Bush's lies because they had no evidence to the contrary.

Remember that Colin Powell was given talking points to the UN that turned out to be false.

There are people to be gone after about Benghazi but not Rice. Why not go after the source of her information, the intelligence community?

It's not over till it's over, Joe Brewer

Joe Brewer, my point all along has been that the republicans are attacking the wrong person. Why aren't they going after the CIA and/or Hillary Clinton? Clinton, by the way is investigating Benghazi through the state dept which is where it should be investigated. There is no proof that Rice was running interference for Obama and the thought about Al Quada. And Al Quada has been decimated, but not defeated.
Obama hasn't even nominated anyone yet. If he thinks she's worth fighting for then he should go for it. He regained a lot of good will and capital in his second election; you might have heard Boehner say that Obamacare is now the law of the land. He wouldn't have had to ram it through had the republicans not been dedicated to stopping every thing he proposed.

He's a do as I say, and not as I do hypocritical politician. In addition, he is a horse faced blow hard who is a liar. Plain and simple!

James, who are you talking about? Who's the blow hard?

John "Rambo" Kerry, Carol

Yeah, Joe, he told reps he won - in a meeting to work with them. George Bush said he won political capital in the election and he intended to spend it. What Obama said is no different, and if the reps can't handle that reality they have no business being in Congress. They need to grow up. During Obama's inauguration the reps set their agenda to obstruct every thing he proposed. Do you realize how far along in recovery we might be if they had gone along even just a little big?

Deborah, I stand corrected about McCain but I still think he and the others are making way too much of Rice's role. As for the timing of the explosion, I don't see how Patraeus could coordinate his sex scandal with that, and Hillary has said for months that she wasn't staying for a second term. Your thoughts about taxes are worth considering but the system we have now is just not fair.

Patch, you're great, but please take note: you will probably get on a spam blocking list because of this, like Restonweb did. I suggest you put a limit on outgoing e-mails and messages to any given user - it should be more deliberate to opt in for e-mail notification, and probably users should be dropped from any thread notification list after one or two days if they don't opt to stay on it. Also, users should have an option to limit the number of e-mail messages daily, and a report should be available when they log in if they want to see threads with replies at that time. That would make more sense, and it would keep you off the spammer list. Patch does NOT belong on a spammer list.

Robert, I don't get Patch notices but I'm with you that this post has gone far off the original topic. I've made my points and now I'm done with this. I'll say though that everyone has been reasonably calm and respectful and that's wonderful!

So tragic and unnecessary.

Wanna bet?

Mitt would be a better choice for Treasury. The campaign showed that foreign policy is not his strong suit, and that his approach to it differs sharply from Obama's.