Gay Patriot Header Image

The media, General Petraeus and Benghazi

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 3:02 am - November 10, 2012.
Filed under: Benghazi / Libya crisis,Media Bias

Like many fans of General David Petraeus, I was shocked yesterday by the news of his resignation.  He has demonstrated, in service of our country, the kind of leadership we need in all walks of life.

Over at Commentary, Max Boot sums up the general’s accomplishments, saying the general deserves our thanks, not our obloquy.

Boot’s colleague Jonathan S. Tobin wonders if Petraeus’s resignation will get the media interested in Benghazi, finding their fascination with the story most revealing, particularly given their apparent disinterest in questions about the administration’s reaction to the attack on the American consulate in that Libyan city:

But the avalanche of press coverage that Petraeus attracted in the hours after his announcement ought to bring into focus a far more important story that most of the same media has ignored: the Benghazi fiasco. It speaks volumes about the current state of contemporary American journalism that a sex scandal generated far more interest from broadcast networks and the press than the questions of whether the administration failed to aid Americans besieged in Libya or why the government stuck to a bogus story about a video instead of admitting that terrorists were responsible.

Read the whole thing.  A number of people are wondering if there is more to the story than a leader’s indiscretions.  Another Commentary blogger wonders “who had the dirt on Petraeus?

UPDATE: Coincidence that the general announces his resignation just days before he was supposed to testify before the House Intelligence Committee?



  1. @ V the K
    I beleive that’s called the “Levi defense.”

    Comment by The_Livewire — November 11, 2012 @ 8:21 pm - November 11, 2012

  2. Catseye also forgot 2008, an election The Right never got over. Remember the Tea Party?

    Comment by Vince Smetana — November 11, 2012 @ 12:16 pm – November 11, 2012

    LOL, yup; putting together a grassroots political movement and voting people out of office in the next cycle is “not getting over something”.

    There really is no limit to how far you and your family will go to demonize those who would dare vote against Comrade Husak….I mean, Obama…. and the Party, is there?

    But that’s really the point. Fascists insist that everything they do is justified, i.e. their shrieking and screaming over Bush, and that anything anyone does against them is not.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — November 11, 2012 @ 8:34 pm - November 11, 2012

  3. “I say that you did it too” defenses are always weak. And when the issue is how long it takes you to get over the 2000 election, bringing up something relatively recent like the 2008-2010 elections is even weaker.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — November 12, 2012 @ 6:32 pm - November 12, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.