Meet the Press on Benghazi, “We’ll get to that a little bit later.” But they never did.

During a round table discussion on “Meet the Press” this morning, Carly Fiorina brought up the failures during and after the Benghazi attacks (see above). As she was laying out the case against the Obama’s administration’s response, host David Gregory interrupted and brushed the critique aside with, “Let’s get to Libya a little bit later.” Guess what happened when they came back to the topic of Libya? Nothing. They never came back to it. Not only does Gregory fail to initiate discussion about the topic, he cuts off the one person who did.

One would think that the deaths of four Americans might get a little more attention on a show like “Meet the Press”—a show that is vaunted for making candidates and pols talk about things that they don’t want to talk about. Yet here is David Gregory displaying very little curiosity about what happened. How is it possible for the press to turn a blind eye to the biggest foreign policy debacle of the President’s tenure?

(HT: Jonah Goldberg)


  • Steve Martin

    Just a terrible thing that the Obama administration did. Not only the lives of the 4 Americans, but also putting in danger the lives of the man that made that scapegoat video that the White House erroneously blamed for the attack, and his families lives. Plus the lives of millions around the world who would be targets for radicals who believed the White House’s lies about that video, and calling attention to it needlessly.

    Wreckless, immoral, and criminal, in my opinion.

    • Brent Hobbs

      Just because something has possible political implications doesn’t mean discussing it is political. I reject that assumption.

      Evangelicals have been too quiet on this whole issue, I think in large measure to avoid the appearance of partisanship. If the media would do its job, it wouldn’t be up to regular citizens to be “relentless” on it.

  • John Holmberg

    Wow, you really moderated my comment and all I was doing was claiming you took this whole thing out of context since Gregory was only trying to keep them on topic and this woman was chasing a rabbit? Really? How are you not a bigot? There’s a reason you have a reputation on the blogosphere for being a right-wing fundamentalist.

      • John Holmberg

        1. I’m not on the left. In fact, my vote is for Romney this time around. Thanks for making assumptions though.

        2. Honesty is not the same thing as intolerance. Intolerance is not listening to others, not showing respect for others, excluding others. Denny is a good example of this, as evidenced by his moderating my comments when I call him out on something, but then pushing my comments through when it will make him look like he’s being persecuted for “truth’s” sake (I know how this works, as this ain’t my first rodeo). I read blogs like this (along with left-wing blogs) to get a variety of opinions and hear all sides. Denny is notorious for always towing the party line, equating right-wing politics with “Christianity,” excluding those who disagree with him even in minor doctrinal matters (e.g. inerrancy, Calvinism, etc.), and being a rigid thinker that doesn’t listen, misrepresents others, and tries to start battles and create division. He’s polarizing, and he thinks he speaks for God and stands up for truth, so because of this he thinks he can do it in the meanest, most hateful, most divisive way possible. Merely saying he’s a right-wing fundamentalist and a bigot is not an act of intolerance, it’s an act of honesty. If I don’t say these things, who will? Perhaps it comes off as mean, but honesty isn’t always nice.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.