checking 

Barry the Obama is neither Prince Valiant nor Sir Lancelot. And Susan Rice is certainly not Queen Guinevere or Princess Diana. At Wednesday's press conference, Obama's effort to strike a white knight pose for Rice made him look more like a street gangsta than the allegedly most powerful political figure in the world. One wonders - does he want to take John McCain on in a hoopsy shoot-em-up or Lindsay Graham in a game of mouthier than thou? Obama and Rice got themselves into the imbroglio over Rice's role in the Benghazi murders of an American ambassador and three security men. Obama sent Rice out as the spokeswoman for his administration to five Sunday morning news programs, television productions that can perk up news junkies for several days. Now, all of a sudden, Sir Barry of Chicago gets his dander up because McCain and Graham dare to question Rice's truthfulness in statements she made on those morning news shows about a crummy video that supposedly enthused insulted Islamists to demonstrate outside the Benghazi consulate in Libya. Is Barry the Noble going to get his testosterone alight if some American politician insults his current secretay of state, Mrs. Clinton? Is he going to strap on a broadsword and gather about him an escort of beknighted Secret Service agents to go out on the streets of Washington seeking McCain or Graham so he can slap one of them demand satisfaction for Rice's honor? Finally, one has to wonder whether Obama the Noble is such a poor judge of Cabinet-level talent that he feels he has to defend all the women in that body if they encounter attacks on their professional conduct, attacks he determines belittles their personal honor. The American Ambassador to such a body as the United Nations needs rhino skin thick enough to rival an unpleasant opponent like Krushchev or Iranian diplomats out to challenge the nation the U.S. Ambassador represents. If Obama's dander has been stirred enough so he nominates Rice to be America's top diplomat, the pair of them would for a second time be asking for the same kind of congressional criticism that Rice could not ward off even if she wore a suit of Kevlar armor.

Well, Obama stated in the news conference today that Rice was just stating the administration's belief that the attack was the result of a spontaneous group's reaction to a video.  She went on several news shows and reiterated that. In the third debate, Obama stated that he declared it was a terrorist attack on September 12th, in the Rose Garden. Which is it Mr. President? Did you know it was a terrorist attack and let Ms. Rice mislead the nation or were you lying in the debate?

test

test

test

Boston Globe, in its opinion piece disguised as news, here says "WASHINGTON – President Obama aggressively defended ambassador Susan Rice on Wednesday, using his first postelection news conference to pointedly rebut Republican charges that the diplomat misled the American public in the aftermath of the attacks in Libya. Obama called “outrageous” suggestions that she has not been forthcoming about attacks that killed four Americans, including US Ambassador Christopher Stevens. His strong defense of Rice ..." ACTUALLY, the President did NOT rebut Republican charges here. Since when he was asked by a reporter "Could you you tell the families of the dead Americans that you did everything on your power to save them? Obama's reply "The Investigation is STILL continuing" We'll let everybody know what happened in about 10 years".– And the President then said that He told Susan Rice what to say. That HE supplied the "Intelligence" that said that the attack was the result of a Video. Therefore, Ms. Rice was nothing but a political ROBOT for the White House. And also Republicans have been asking why the UN Abmassador was sent out to report on an "Intelligence briefing". Why not a defense department official. Why not Hillary Clinton?..So the FAKE anger by the president just raises yet NEW questions about his credibility.

Younger readers need to realize that Lindsay Graham was one of the leading henchman in the impeachment of Clinton over sex. McCain used to be honorable but this is now personal because the man who said he'd rather lose an election rather than do the dishonorable thing would now rather win the election. The Republicans are afraid of sex and they never think they have lost an election!

I find it stunning that the first time the Globe addresses this issue, it is in the context of the President doing a press conference in which this came up.  Was this NOT news before the press conference?  The fawning groupies at the press conference were a disgrace to their profession, as is Matt Viser.  Susan Rice DID mislead the public, when declaring on 5 talk shows that the terrorist attacks were simply protests over a video that got over heated.  

The media in this country takes a vacation from its duties when the apple of their collective eye is president.  We nneed to know who told Rice to lie, and why.  Too bad the media is content in helping the president avoid scandal.

Such outrage from the Senator who chose Sarah Palin to be a heartbeat away from his presidency is simply ludicrous. As for the disrespectful neo-Confederate from SC, his behavior plays only to his pathetic (thankfully losing) base.

So the CIA gives info to the Pres. to the Congress including this same info to McCain, the Pres. gives it to Rice who repeats the info on a talk show and Rice is to blame.  I at one time supported McCain but he has truly lost it.  I feel sorry for him.  He stands in front of a national audience blames a UN rep for CIA errors.  Errors the CIA admits it made, but McCain blames the messenger.  It's like blaming the telegraph delivery man for the bad news.  Stupid and sad to be looking this hard for a reason to fight with someone who beat you in an election.

@Attaturk said that the CIA gave Susan Rice the briefing before she went on talk shows. Absolutely, the press, like this newspaper, has been completely DUCKING news about Benghazi, Libya. And NO, Attaturk, the CIA did NOT give any briefing to Susan Rice. If you actually watched the news conference, as oppposed to the Globe's rather biased "interpretation" of what happened, The Globe fails to point out that Obama finally came out and said that he told Susan Rice what to say. And it is Obama who is claiming that it was an "intelligence failure" that caused him and Hillary Clinton to claim that "The Video Did it". ..When Obama, using FAKE anger (we have seen this all before), defends Susan Rice, he is admitting that Rice was nothing more than a political ROBOT for the White House. And, Globe refuses to mention what Republicans have complained out here. Why was the UN Amb assador sent out to go on talk shows anyway? It should have been a Defense department official, the Justice Dept, or best of all, Hillary Clinton

Lindsay Graham being Lindsay Graham is to be expected. But it is kind of sad to watch the public unwinding of John McCain who I never voted for but until the Palin choice had some respect for. I would hope there is someone close enough to him to counsel him that it is better to be known as having been the well regarded Senator from Arizona rather than as a cranky old man who stayed on after his intellectual prowess had long since departed. I feel the embarasement he seems not to be sensitive to.

With articles like this that run interference for President Obama by completely whitewashing the early Benghazi dynamic between the White House, Ambassador Rice, and the intelligence gathering agencies of State, DOD, and CIA, it is not surprising that Globe readers need to look elsewhere for accurate news. The corrupt blurring of the line between reporting and editorializing - a regular feature of these pages and the signal feature of today’s advocacy journalism - explains more than any other factor the newspaper’s declining circulation. The simple facts of Benghazi are these: the attack occurred on September 11 (Mommy, why is that day different from all other days?). State early on acknowledged that the security cameras showed no activity outside the consulate’s walls until armed men began an assault at 9:40 P.M. Libya time (i.e., there never had been a demonstration, spontaneous or otherwise). Within 24 hours everyone - State, DOD, CIA, DIA, NSA, FBI (and probably L.L. Bean) - knew the true nature of the incident: a planned terrorist assault, not an anti-Muslim video-inspired flash riot. But on October 16, five days after the attack, Rice was making the rounds of the Sunday morning TV shows (five in all!) spinning “the video made them do it” version of the story: “The information, the best information and the best assessment we have today, is that in fact this was not a preplanned, premeditated attack,” Rice said on Fox News Sunday. Having allowed herself to be used once as either a stooge or a liar, Obama owes Rice big time. So the President obligingly has decided to reward her by ... using her as a stooge and a liar a second time: floating her name as a Secretary of State candidate knowing that her nomination is dead on arrival. Why? Because next to Rice’s candidacy, the candidacy of faux war hero John Kerry (O’Bama’s real choice) might appear palatable to Republican senators. Who knows? As always, the far more interesting question is what did the President know, and when did he know it? Obama’s lack of forthrightness and stonewalling on Benghazi far surpasses anything seen from Nixon during Watergate, where no Americans died, no Americans had to fight off America’s enemies for over seven hours, no Americans had to make desperate radio calls for reinforcements, and no Americans had to endure the chilling experience of having those calls ignored by the chain of command.

Why hasn't anyone asked Obama why he wants to penalize marriage with his tax proposal? Why not $400,0000 for married couples, instead of $250,000? Look what this kind of policy did for marriage and families since the 60's who receive welfare benefits.

President Obama practices the "DIVINE RIGHT OF KINGS" doctrin constantly and the people of this country do not have the right to disagree with him ....he believes his wisdom superseads others all other claims. You have made a less than wise choice in voting for this man and we are all forced to live under the his choices one way or another as any oposition soon fades away.

Rice repeated Obama's stories about Benghazi - knowing his details were wrong, wrong, wrong.

Good soldiers are generally rewarded . . . Rice will be rewarded.

How in the name of the grey squirrel atop the Pru does the Boston Globe label this story as an exclusive in its online postings? The editor that approved that posting falls into the same category as Susan Rice . . . lying to public. So no promotion for that unnamed Globe editor to that open spot running for coffee.

She lied ( to the American people, on 5 different news shows) because the WH told her too. Is that a defensible position?

HE sent her out there with stupid lies. Now he has to rush to defend her??? What a fraud. But he's cute when he acts tough.