I’m sure you don’t, because it puts the administration in a bad light. “Move along, nothing to see here”, right? Problem is, that if you really believe that the important part of the story are the lives that were lost, then you should want to know exactly how they were lost in order to prevent it from happening in the future.
The fact is that there are two events here. One is what happened that night in Benghazi. The other is how the administration handled explaining it to the American people.
And it appears that most of you aren’t aware that many very well respected liberal voices, like Bob Woodward, are of the mind that the administration handled the aftermath dishonestly.
I laugh when I imagine how the tenor here would change if a disinformation campaign like Benghazi happened with Bush in the White House. HA! Friggin hilarious.
No, dipshit. The reality of the situation, is that Benghazi wasn’t an epic failure or an attempt at dissemination.
It was an attack, and aside from the horseshit your gullible ass hears on the tee-vee, stopping it would have been near impossible.
Now, if it had been Bush, sure, a lot of people on the left would have blamed him. However, they wouldn’t have had the multiple-year Clownshoe Express™ that the GOP has been putting on.
That may very well be the case. I’m very open to that interpretation. But we cannot know that if we don’t know what actually happened. And the administration did it’s utmost to make sure that the facts did not reach the American people. They sent that idiot Jarrett out that Sunday and just had her relay bullshit. Again, many respectable voices on your side of the spectrum are of this opinion. So, pay attention, wouldya?
Well, given the fact that multiple years haven’t passed, your probably right. Wait—my God, you actually got something right. By accident, sure, but right none the less. Good for you.
It was an attack on a consulate by bad people. It happens. Happened over and over again under Bush.
The trouble is I am paying attention. I understand the issue, and aren’t colored by your prejudices or the horseshit misinformation that has turned, what I am sure was a very nice, normal person, into the gibbering he-twat you are today. It was called a terrorist attack immediately after. And the RW theory, that the administration somehow planned to gain something by calling it a spontaneous attack, is incoherent, and if you ask me, evidence of simply not thinking.
We are in the *second *year. The one year anniversary was on Sept. 11 2013.
Oh, I agree with that. But that has nothing to do with the subsequent incident, i.e., what we were told afterwards.
I bow before you’re pure, pristine, unadulterated magnificence, untouched and unaffected by the world around you. :rolleyes:
I’d like a cite for them calling it a terrorist attack immediately after. And should you manage to find one, do you disagree with the rest of the earth’s sentient being’s that when Jarrett when on the talk shows that Sunday that she was very careful to NOT call it a terrorist attack? Just like the president did for weeks?
I’d use that phrase when something has transpired for over two full years or at least near it, but I accept that you have a lower bar then I do for veracity.
Amazing, you found the one error I’ve ever made on these boards. I am now officially devastated.
What we were told afterwards was hardly weird or odd. You’re just responding to RW media that told you to be pissed.
I have no special powers, I just am able to think and reason. You are limited by false information that you think is true, it’s throwing off your conclusions.
Please proceed, governor.
Rice, not Jarret.
I find the indignation about saying an “act of terror” and not calling something “terrorism” utterly laughable. Since you have no idea what you’re talking about, you’re just pointing at something and acting outraged.
At the time, and with the TP that Rice had, it was unclear what happened, so they didn’t say outright it was X. That’s called being reasonable.
I used the term precisely, because I knew the actual date. You’re so fucking uninformed, you thought it happened this year.
With the Rice one above, you’re accelerating rapidly.
Not interested. Details are important … but only on interesting topics.
Are some government policies and minor bureaucrats incompetent? Certainly; one can skim any account of the GWB travesties to learn that much. Is part of the problem budget cuts and Congress’ attitude that high officials and Congresspeople should stop doing useful work and spend much of their time in hearings trying to embarrass the Administration? No doubt.
But one sincerely wonders why right-wing assholes waste everyone’s time babbling and babbling. Do they hope to unearth a memo like
[QUOTE=Secy of State to Pres]
Turned down a request to beef up security. Am hoping terrorists kill Americans because, as you know, we all hate Freedom and worship bloodshed. I’ll collect the American blood and bring it to your Satanic birthday celebration in Kenya next month!
Keep up the hating! I’m rounding up more babies for you. Should I kill them now or leave them on ice?
[/QUOTE]
If this isn’t it, I wonder if adaher can come up with any believable explanation for their whining other than “Any verbal vomit, true or not, that increases electoral chances for us hypocrites is a good thing.”
Wow, politicians handling something “dishonestly”. Do you know how to tell when a politician is being dishonest? His mouth is moving.
Dishonesty in government happens every day, it is not news and it is not a scandal.
For example, Republicans are currently claiming that the Obamacare website violates HIPAA. This is a lie. It is not a scandal, it is just a lie.
So the administration was dishonest in the days immediately following the incident. There, I said it, they were dishonest. Whoopee, my life (and everyone else’s in the world) is now completely unchanged. That was worth it.
I’ve only skimmed the thread (and normally ignore Mr. N01, but he was quoted); am I still allowed to make nominations for stupidest post?
I’d like a cite that anyone anywhere has ever named Woodward as a “well respected liberal voice.” Comments about Woodward often focus on his being a successful journalist happy to misrepresent those on either side of the aisle. A more genuine and intelligent “liberal voice,” Christopher Hitchens, accused Woodward of acting as “stenographer to the rich and powerful.”
Question for magellan, adaher, and anyone else who wants to take a shot.
Are we done with Benghazi, or are you still waiting for some big revelation about what the administration was trying to cover up? The 60 minutes piece dealt with the attack, but it seems that the biggest problem is that the administration lied to the American people about the reason for the attack for some end. Are you satisfied with the speculation into the reason for the lie, or do you believe there are more facts out there to be discovered to lead to a bigger scandal for the administration? Do you support the continuation of investigations (including holding other Congressional work hostage until it is “done”)?
Not to be repetitious and say the same thing over and over, but that’s kinda my question. What new revelations are at hand as a result of this 60 Minutes piece?
Yeah, when did that happen? They used to be better, weren’t they?
Nothing.
Benghazi is pretty much the only arrow in the Republican quiver to prevent 8 years of Hillary following 8 years of Obama. So they are going to run with it. What other choice do they have? Its not like they have any decent candidates that can make it through their primary process without saying things that will haunt them in a general election (unless the tea party is defanged fairly soon).
I do admire the enthusiasm for the real story, which is as fervent as it is selective. Many of the same lot who still make excuses for the Iraq war, and who scream to see Edward Snowden drawn and quartered for daring to reveal that our government has been feeding every American man, woman and budgie a conveyor belt of factory-grade bullshit for the last howevermany fucking years, are suddenly tonsured disciples of the Absolute Truth on this one isolated issue.
The Republicans are so incapable of governing and devoid of ideas they will find something, anything, Benghazi or not, to hound Hillary if she manages to get elected in 2016. I don’t see the sense of inevitability about her election so many others see, but I know with an absolute certainty that any Democrat the public dares to put in the White House will be hounded with bullshit scandals from first day to last; its the standard MO at this point.
The Republicans of the late 20th /early 21st century have shown they are the biggest babies and sore losers in the political history of this country.
I have to agree. The Obama administration and their security appendages fucked up and lives were lost as a result. But as Hamlet so succinctly implies, what fairly recent Presidential administration EVER didn’t fuck up and get people killed, even in what one would assume was a preventable situation?
I do think that the admin could have handled the dissemination of information better, admitted a screw up, etc…but politicians in general aren’t well known for taking responsibility for things like this when they can deflect them instead.
CBS’s main Benghazi witness filed a report that said he was nowhere near the diplomatic compound on the night of the attack.
Journalism has fallen very far indeed in the last forty or so years.
It doesn’t matter. It’s the same old shit. A trumped-up ‘scandal’ that turns out to be smoke and mirrors, and in the end the true believers have their hate-fest and a vague imprint of a righteous victory that’s impervious to logic and reason.
