Rambling of the Day: The evolution of a lie

19 Oct

I’m sure in our new and evolving world, where people’s beliefs and ideas about their own principles somehow evolve over time, we have new and evolving definitions of what a lie is. But I’m going to go out on a limb and be my old-fashioned self and say Mr. Obama lied in the debate Tuesday night when he tried to claim that he said, the day after the Benghazi attack, that the attack was an act of terror. Now, I’m slightly disappointed that Mitt Romney didn’t hammer him with the word terrorism. Instead, he struggled to pin him down by saying he did not call the attack an act of terror. What he should have said is, You did not call the attack an act of terrorism.

Saying something is an “act of terror” is not entirely synonymous with saying it is a “terrorist attack or “act of terrorism.” An act of terror can be any heinous act, like the shooting in the movie theater in Colorado. Rape can be considered an act of terror. That does not mean that it is an act of terrorism.

In his speech in the rose garden the day after the attack (Sept. 12), Obama said, “No acts of terror will ever shake the resolve of this great nation, alter that character, or eclipse the light of the values that we stand for.” He also called the attack a “terrible act.” He did not admit that it was a premeditated act of terrorism, which has vastly different implications. Now to be fair, one can use the word terror when talking about terrorism. So I’ll step back for a moment and say that if the president indeed called this an “act of terror,” attributing it to terrorism, then I would cut him some slack. What he said in the rose garden was not an admission that the attack in Benghazi was caused by terrorists. It was a general statement saying the resolve of the United States would not be shaken by acts of terror.

But really, that was only one day after the attack. Maybe he just didn’t have enough information yet. Okay, sure. But if Obama and his staff didn’t have enough information to call it an act of terrorism, then how could they possibly have had enough information to go around for two weeks spreading the idea that the attack was a spontaneous attack caused by an anti-Muslim Youtube video? If it would have been a premature assumption to call it a terrorist attack, then it certainly would have been an assumption to call it a spontaneous attack caused by an American-made Youtube video. Yes, it certainly would have been an assumption, a giant leap of an assumption – one that will now come back to bite this administration for its incompetence.

So, Obama comes out Tuesday night saying he said from the beginning this was an act of terror. Right. What Obama is trying to do here by twisting his words and rewriting recent history for the American people, who are obviously too unintelligent to figure out what was said ourselves, is exactly like what Bill Clinton tried to do with the Lewinski scandal. Rewrite history. Change the facts, or change what the facts mean, at least. Manipulate them in a way that won’t change the words that were said but will magically change their meaning. And then he will sigh and say, “Duh. Of course this is what I meant when I said that. Come on, try to follow, guys.” And we’ll slap our foreheads and suddenly be enlightened to what the meaning of the word is is.

By the way:

The White House now says the attack probably was carried out by an al Qaida-linked group, with no public demonstration beforehand. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton blamed the “fog of war” for the early conflicting accounts. (AP)

The “fog of war.” The conflicting stories from the CIA. This Youtube video. Mitt Romney’s speech the next day that threw everyone off. The other uprisings occurring throughout the Middle East. The fact that the president had to hurry off to Las Vegas to get to campaigning the next day. I don’t know, probably George W. Bush, too.

Everyone and everything is to blame for this misunderstanding. Everyone, that is, except the president, the commander-in-chief, who claimed in his rose garden speech, “I’ve also directed my administration to increase our security at diplomatic posts around the world,” yet takes no responsibility for the lack of security there in the first place. Perhaps he’s started attending his intelligence briefings and has decided to, you know, do his job. Perhaps this is just more rhetoric to try to calm down all of us who are overly excited and overly suspicious about this. But for those of us who are old fashioned, his administration has lied about this attack, and it will not be long before the cover-up – the cover-up that is always worse than the implications for telling the truth would have been – is brought to light.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

The Ugly Volvo

Attempts at Adulthood

Nathan Hancock

Probably not a waste of your time.

The Matt Walsh Blog

Absolute Truths (and alpaca grooming tips)

All We Are

Updates and a look behind the scenes of the non-profit organization


Creative Director

Lean Fit and Healthy Forever

One Guys Journey to Fitness


Home of Glitter and Leg Warmers


Who Said What

Elisabeth Akinwale

Athletics, Motherhood and Other SuperFantastic Subjects

Dyslexia Parents Guide

A parents journey into dyslexia

Honest Food with Amy

Changing my lifestyle, one recipe at a time!

Egg Whites Only Please

With Cheese. And Bacon. On a Bagel. Oh gosh, I love bagels (as long as they're Gluten Free).

Parenting And Stuff

Not a "how to be a great parent" blog


Good eats along I-64 in Virginia and a few beyond!

365 Days of Bacon

Every day. Bacon-fied.

%d bloggers like this: