Libya-gate makes Watergate look like chump change!

In last week's debate, *Obama feigned outrage and offense that he would intentionally "mislead" the country regarding the Libya debacle.

Here's all you need to know: Obama LIED. Four men died. (This just in--read Gordon Crovitz's excellent opinion piece in today's Wall Street Journal: "You Tube Videos Don't Kill People.")

I am a card carrying member of the Vietnam-Watergate generation. We were weaned on Watergate as the worst political scandal in U.S. history. Compared with this administration's lies and obfuscations, Watergate was kindergarten, sandbox stuff. Most of my generation was brainwashed by the Washington Post's hack reporters, Woodward and Bernstein along with the rest of the msm (main-stream media) to believe that Watergate was the last word in political subterfuge.

Nixon and Watergate pale in comparison to what is unraveling before our very eyes. I say this at the risk of sounding callous and being accused of betraying my generation's trumped-up outrage over Watergate, but the fact is: Nobody died because of Watergate! Nobody!

Watergate was chump change compared to the deaths of our Ambassador Chris Stevens, Sean Smith, a Foreign Service information officer, and Tyrone S. Woods and Glen A. Doherty, two former Navy SEALs working as security personnel at the consulate in Benghazi.

Don't expect Bob Woodward or the NY Times to investigate Libya-gate. Why? Because it originated with their man, President Obama. He's a Democrat and the media has to protect him and provide him cover. Woodward and Bernstein will be conspicuously absent and will choose not to exercise their journalistic skills along with the rest of the media who will yawn and report that this is much ado about nothing. But it's not. BTW, if you want some serious objective reporting on the Libya debacle and the President's lies, go to Fox News.com for a chilling 2-part video timeline and reenactment of the Libya attack and how this administration responded.

Hopefully, Romney will challenge the President's phony bluster and outrage in Monday's debate. Obama never called it a terrorist attack. He blamed it on a video for two weeks. Charles Krauthammer has offered Romney a zinger of a comeback for Monday's debate:

You are offended by this accusation, Mr. President? The country is offended that your press secretary, your U.N. ambassador, and you yourself have repeatedly misled the nation about the origin and nature of the Benghazi attack.

The problem wasn’t the video, the problem was policies for which you say you now accept responsibility. Then accept it, Mr. President. You were asked in the last debate why more security was denied our people in Libya despite the fact that they begged for it. You never answered that question, Mr. President. Or will you blame your Secretary of State?

 Remember the first rule of selecting a president: When the White House phone rings at 3am, who do you want answering it? Or better yet, do you want someone who will even be there at 3am and not in Las Vegas partying with Jay-Z or yukking it up with David Letterman?