2012 U.S. Presidential Election

[Plantae]

I can merely look at the evidence and see it was clear cut, you had a embassy under attack, unknown amount of Americans inside that could be dead or dying. You had Jets that could easily be scrambled and there within a hour or less, such a tactic has been used in the past to disperse crowds. And if the crowds did not disperse the jets could have fired upon them. The President's top priority is to protect American lives, he failed in that.

I understand why you'd make this argument. And you're right, that is a president's duty. But I can also imagine a number of ways that others would make different conclusions based on the same evidence. Personally, I don't think there's anything exceptional about American lives, as opposed to the lives of other human beings.

OK, quench those flames... again.

Roy, the use of the word "retard" as an insult was uncalled for. The only reason you're not getting an infraction is because it was aimed at a politician and not a TPM member.

Plantae, however, gets an infraction for calling Roy a bigot. If someone does something wrong, you don't fix it by insulting him.

Thank you, Lady Vulpix. I'm sorry for making your job difficult. And I don't envy the role you're forced to play here.

But I also know that you're a human being. So I'll make it clear that I don't apologize for my comment. In fact, I think if someone does something wrong, then sometimes, the only correct response is to get angry about it. I don't think it's fair to insult anyone without reason. But I will call a spade a spade.

[Roy Karrde]

I understand why you'd make this argument. And you're right, that is a president's duty. But I can also imagine a number of ways that others would make different conclusions based on the same evidence. Personally, I don't think there's anything exceptional about American lives, as opposed to the lives of other human beings.

I am not saying there is, but the President has sworn a oath to protect American lives first, and mind you a mere run from jets can disperse a crowd. Not to mention these are innocent lives inside the consulate being attacked by terrorists, do they not deserve armed protection to prevent their deaths?

[Plantae]

I am not saying there is, but the President has sworn a oath to protect American lives first, and mind you a mere run from jets can disperse a crowd. Not to mention these are innocent lives inside the consulate being attacked by terrorists, do they not deserve armed protection to prevent their deaths?

Of course they do. But the president is operating in an environment where a rash foreign policy decision could result in the loss of more life, not less. There are repercussions and future consequences that must be taken into account. There is a reason these decisions are so fraught. They're not as easy as they sometimes seem. I also agree in this instance that the president made a mistake; but he did out of a desire to fulfill his duty, not a desire to avert it.

[Roy Karrde]

Of course they do. But the president is operating in an environment where a rash foreign policy decision could result in the loss of more life, not less. There are repercussions and future consequences that must be taken into account. There is a reason these decisions are so fraught. They're not as easy as they sometimes seem. I also agree in this instance that the president made a mistake; but he did out of a desire to fulfill his duty, not a desire to avert it.

His duty is to protect American lives, not to playcate the Libyan Government. If he placed the happiness of the Libyan Government over the lives of American men and women then he is not fit to hold office.

[Plantae]

Yes, I'm a human being, thanks for noticing! But you're not making it sound like a good thing.

Anyway, spades won't fight back, but people will. If you insult someone, you're not encouraging to improve his behavior. On the contrary, he'll now be more likely to respond in kind.

I didn't mean it to sound patronizing. I'm simply suggesting that I'm not so cowed by this infraction that I don't think this a point worth arguing.

There's a difference between an insult, which is generally unfounded, and an indictment of character. It's not possible to address the wrong action without addressing the actor. There's no way to address bigotry without implying that someone is a bigot. And not calling someone out on this fact is doing absolutely nothing to end the persistence of bigotry.

It's true, a positive tact is often better. People can be coaxed, encouraged to improve themselves. But not in every instance. And when something is heinous enough, fault is warranted.

But I completely agree that what I said was a violation of the policy here against flaming.

His duty is to protect American lives, not to playcate [sic] the Libyan Government. If he placed the happiness of the Libyan Government over the lives of American men and women then he is not fit to hold office.

If. The argument you present here is a straw man. It's not as if it was a simple trade-off of "placate" or "protect." I doubt the intention by the president was this simple, or that the foreign policy concerns of the attacks were so readily truncated. But even if it they were, it is also entirely possible that the president thought he was taking the best course, which would succeed in achieving both those aims.

If we judged presidents solely on the basis of their foreign policy decisions, and moreover, on the basis of their worst foreign policy decision, I assure you that absolutely none of them would be fit to hold office. Instead, we hope, against hope, that they will do the best they can under the circumstances. Oftentimes, they disappoint us. And they should be held accountable. And we should be angry. But that doesn't mean that the same presidents that disappointed us aren't capable of making the right decisions, or choosing the right policies. Mistakes are learned from, not forgotten.

[Roy Karrde]

If. The argument you present here is a straw man. It's not as if it was a simple trade-off of "placate" or "protect." I doubt the intention by the president was this simple, or that the foreign policy concerns of the attacks were so readily truncated. But even if it they were, it is also entirely possible that the president thought he was taking the best course, which would succeed in achieving both those aims.

In which case impeachment proceedings should proceed as he has failed the office to take even the most basic options to protect Americans.

If we judged presidents solely on the basis of their foreign policy decisions, and moreover, on the basis of their worst foreign policy decision, I assure you that absolutely none of them would be fit to hold office. Instead, we hope, against hope, that they will do the best they can under the circumstances. Oftentimes, they disappoint us.

Yet even here he has failed in the most basic principal of the Presidency which is to protect American lives and property. He had the means and opportunity to do so, and he did not do it.

[Plantae]

In which case impeachment proceedings should proceed as he has failed the office to take even the most basic options to protect Americans.

Not taking the "most basic options" would mean not providing any support, whatsoever. There were provisions for security. Were they adequate? No. But the "most basic options" were certainly provided here. Any additional security would have been more than "most basic."

Yet even here he has failed in the most basic principal of the Presidency which is to protect American lives and property. He had the means and opportunity to do so, and he did not do it.

The suggestion here seems to be that the president believed the ten-member CIA team present at the consulate would be enough to repel the attack.

[Dark Sage]

In which case impeachment proceedings should proceed as he has failed the office to take even the most basic options to protect Americans.

Not going to happen. I don't think Boehnir will take that step. After all, no-one even considered taking that step against Bush after we found out that he had ample warning of the attack that caused thousands of American casualties.