it's impossible to have a rational conversation with some conservatives on anything, just read these wacky statements on rightwing blogs and the findings from a poll recently taken in Ohio.
This is from Jim Hoft of some rightwing blog whose name I refuse to repeat here and who has been given the distinguished title of "The Stupidest Man on the Internet:"
The dishonesty surrounding that statement is not so much outrageous as comical, since no one with any functioning brain cells would believe such slander. President Obama called Libyan President Mohammed Magarief to “thank him for the cooperation the U.S. has received from the Libyan government in responding to the attacks on the U.S. Consulate.” In fact, Libyan authorities have already arrested some suspects. But leave it to the idiot Hoft to twist, deceive, and lie about the truth. This tactic should not surprise anyone, because lots of people on the right employ it as a way to hit back against a reality they cannot bear to face.
Very few readers of the idiot Hoft's blog will bother to check to see if what he wrote has any relationship to the truth--his fans, afterall, are the low-information sect of the far right.
Just recently a poll was taken in Ohio asking Republicans whom do they believe was responsible for the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden:
"According to a PPP poll of likely Ohio voters, 15 percent of Republicans in Ohio think Romney is “more responsible” for bin Laden’s death than Obama, while 47 percent of Republicans are “not sure” whether Obama or Romney deserves more of the credit.
Six percent of the overall respondents gave Romney credit where credit is not at all due. Thirty-one percent of them weren’t sure whether the president or the candidate deserves more credit." --Salon
And it's a good bet their ignorance comes from listening to Rush Limbaugh, FAUX NOOZ, or reading idiot bloggers like Jim Hoft and accepting the rot they promote day after day.
When the US embassy was attacked and Americans killed, the first reaction of the man who is the GOP's presidential nominee was to slander the president of the United States by giving false statements about the president and the events, the second reaction on some rightwing blogs was to double down on those false statements and fail to see what is in front of their noses--Willard Romney is a bumbling neophyte when it comes to foreign policy, and he is a shameless pandering pol who'll say anything anywhere for anyone's vote--with a smirk on his face.
And finally, here in the "Silly Season" comes a Romney spokesperson who claims that had Romney been president, the Arab world would have had more respect for the United States and would have NEVER attacked our embassies:
"A top foreign policy aide to Mitt Romney suggested Thursday that the deadly attack on the U.S. consulate in Libya that killed Ambassador Christopher Stevens would never have happened if Romney were president. There wouldn’t even be anti-American protests in the Middle East if Romney were in charge, the aide said.
'There’s a pretty compelling story that if you had a President Romney, you’d be in a different situation,' Romney adviser Richard Williamson told the Washington Post...
'In Egypt and Libya and Yemen, again demonstrations — the respect for America has gone down, there’s not a sense of American resolve and we can’t even protect sovereign American property,' he said. " --TalkingPointsMemo
I wouldn't go there if I were you, Mr. Top Foreign Policy Aide, lest Americans think about the "respect" shown to America on September 11, 2001, who was president of the United States and which party he belonged to.
This just in:
Claims that President Obama disarmed embassy Marines turns out to be another cowardly wingnut lie