Questions the LSM won't ask...

...because it's hard to ask anything with Obummer's ding-dong that far down their throat.  Luckily, someone's asking them.

Today is October 29. It’s been six weeks and our incurious press (apparently intuiting that if the administration first lied about the story and has now clammed up about it, it mustn’t serve Obama’s re-election efforts) is helpfully ignoring the story. The bird-dog press, who like to say the “comfort the afflicted and afflict the comforted” are doing nothing to make the president uncomfortable; they’re launching no investigations; they’re asking no questions, not even simple, obvious ones, like:

1) If no one gave an order to “stand down” who gave the order to “go save”?

2) If no one gave an order to “go save” just what exactly did the President, the Sec State and the Sec Defense do while they watched Benghazi burn over seven hours. There must be some paper trail, somewhere, that shows us that responsible action was taken, yes?

3) Did they all just vote “present?”

4) Why would you go to the UN, and lie about what happened in Benghazi to the whole world, even as your own spokespeople were admitting that the situation there had nothing to do with a damn video?

5) Was this a gun-running operation? Or some kind of October political theatrical gone bad?

5) People in your administration lied to the public. Should not a few resignations be on the president’s desk? Why isn’t the president asking for them?

6) Does lying not matter any more?

These are not unreasonable questions, and they’re the questions Brian Williams and Chris Matthews and the New York Times and every other news outlet would — quite justifiably — be asking of any other president, particularly if he had an R after his name. And yet, the press will not ask them of Obama.

RTWT.  Great questions, Ma'am.  And you'll get truthful answers from the Thug Regime right about the time Satan puts on a parka.