Those responsible for Benghazi where Four Americans Died should be made to answer for the debacle.

Dear sir. Thank you for your response and sorry for taking so long but I had RLI and wanted to enjoy things. Normally Im’ quite quick to respond. Thank you for following up your opinion. Your original premise was that not specific was responsible for an attack. I pointed out that your premise is fueled by misinformation and bias. I pointed to racist, false and completely biased sources and illogical statement and what I thought was humour dog poop example, which you didn’t refute though. I stand by you blaming the cat for dog poop and should win by default. However . . . Before we begin a basic in logic. You claimed “SD is responsible for A” and provided sources. I claimed the sources you claim are inadequate, I also showed you that “Rep” may have a burden to bear. I also showed the means by which you arrived at “SD is responsible for A” are faulty by your inability to make a clear statement. I also showed you “Rep is also responsible for A”. You did not respond to anything that furthered your claim or refute my claims but instead said well democrats suck to, that’s not furthering “SD is responsible for A”. By default you have shown your argument is unclear, biased and you even proved my point because you more interested in pointing out that democrats are just as bad as republican then furthering your original claim. You’re more interested in ranting and raving then actually proving your point and you’re easily prodded into blame raging. In my opening response I said two rooms argument. In one room is your sources, in the other room is everyone else. Let’s apply this two the second round just to your opening paragraph In my response (and your rebuttal) I referred to Black man in the white house and talking marching, and you and I agree that this is biased and stupid talking point. I agree, but not in the way you automatically assumed though. There is two rooms, one group uses those words and another that doesn’t. I’m assuming from your response you object to those words and want to be in the other room. These are terms from a simple google search from “don’t tread on me” websites. Thank you for confirming the bias of your website, the people with which you stand and your inability to recognize your own personal biased. Though from your other statements on debate. org I double you’ll join the room the rest of modern rational society is in. However trickery to show your biased point aside. Again two rooms, people who agree with equal rights, support equal pay, who are about equal just and fair, and equality, that’s actually feminism. Another room full of people who do not believe in equal rights, equality and social justice. Since you have no idea what actually feminism is, and believe its something derogatory and detriment you have chosen your room. Its ok, I understand your ignorance because in the following sources you listed, I found two articles who completely are misleading on what feminism is. You can search debates on your position here on debate. org for research. As for your claim of Political correctness, it was started before bill Maher got his tv show based on the term. It was coined by people pointing out that white racist using politically correct terms, such as no longer dropping the n word but urban youth to describe blacks. Thank you again for showing you have no history or context of what its actually about and are more interested in ranting and raving then furthering your debate. AS for your 1st and 2nd source, . http://dailycaller.com... . http://www.breitbart.com... The daily caller is biased, slightly racist and factually wrong. Today the first three articles of the day are “extremely misleading - Gallup pool destroys obamas positive job growth”, “People committed terrible deeds in the name of democrats. ” And lastly “teacher of the year took boy into her home had lots of sex with him. ” Ok. Sure the sex article was fun to read, but the other two were biased and completely factually inaccurate. So again the places you go will confirm your bias, so again I refute you claim. Also the various pictures are all showing Obama with charged accusations and him pointing his figure and republicans showing standing up for the little guy, constitution and a blond with really big boobs and smiles. Ok the blond was looking sultry/slutty but could you try to find a website that didn’t have raving racist article in it or completely misleading and outright lies about simple facts. So again, I’m not saying there is no evidence that Obama is not evil, the state department is wrong, or that Hillary may be a man, but could you find a non-biased room to source that. You have yet to show me that room, instead you’re standing in a room with people that have racist roots, are politically biased and only show happy shiny white people and black people pointing and yelling. So if there was another round you could have provided a non-bias source, but right now you’re standing with . . . well its quite apparent. I also put forth how simple it was to get simple accurate knowledge of the attack and the 6 reports from congress and 2 reports still pending. In not a single report did it blame the state-department as you claim. You did not refute this or even bother to acknowledge it showing again personal bias and living in your own information bubble. You failed to refute anything of substance. Also you posted this “Your statement about the White man being responsible for the suggested blights of the black man is refuted by other black men and women who lived under the same social environments of life under the white man’s position. If black people have been denied because of their race how then do you explain the success of those other black people down through history who were successful while being black in a White mans world. ” This was posted by you which is a logical fallacy often repeated. Just because one person wins the lottery out of poverty doesn’t mean that all people do. It also shows a lack of understanding or lack of acknowledgment of facts, context and well simple understanding of economics and history. Also yoru confirming your bias that you’re not living in a racist society by using agreeing with people who confirm your bias. You also posted this “The State of the Union Address exposed a not so well hidden narcissistic attitude of this president, a attitude that has too often been displayed by him while attending to functions of the office of president. On one occasion, of many, when he was challenged to debate an issue by a representative from the republican party Obama couldn't seem to help himself from touting his superior position by inserting the comment that "the election is over and I won. .. " and Obama's State of the Union speech last night was no exception of Obama's narcissistic need to aggrandize himself whenever the opportunity availed itself. Instead of being humbled by the honor of being chosen by the citizens to be their president this president has taken the position that he was elected to deliver his edicts to the people's representatives and their duty, to meekly obey and pass his edicts without question, apparently Obama was serious when he said, " I can do anything I want,"I'm the president. " I think it’s very clear who and what you are, what you represent and in part what you believe. Which is fine, however your have to prove you claim, which you have not. Dear audience and voters, Pro has made an unclear claim, provided biased sources that are clearly have racist roots and political bias. Also instead of refuting the claims that there are others part of the problem, he denigrates someone else in hopes of shifting the burden of proof. . .