Getty Images
Republican rhetoric on Benghazi made a right turn at absurd, and is now headed straight for offensive.
James M. Inhofe of Oklahoma said his panel would focus on the military's response to the assault [on the U.S. consulate in Benghazi]. But, he said, "as bad as everything that I've stated is, what I think is worse is the cover-up."
"It was obvious from the information we had on Sept. 11 that the second wave ... of attacks on the annex was unequivocally a terrorist attack, and we knew it right at the time," he said, accusing the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan E. Rice, of lying to the American people.
The rhetoric from Inhofe, the ranking Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, inches us just a little closer to true madness.
I mean, really. It now appears there's a three-step process in place when dealing with such controversies: (1) Republicans accuse the Obama administration of a scandalous cover-up; (2) Republicans receive independent proof that clearly shows there was no scandalous cover-up; and (3) Republicans decide not to read the proof and again accuse the Obama administration of a scandalous cover-up anyway.
Inhofe still wants to smear Susan Rice? Just for the hell of it? Rice's comments reflected the intelligence community's best available information just a few days after the attack. The far-right's baseless attack on her character already kept her from a cabinet post, so Inhofe is keeping the line of attack going ... for sport?
There was an independent investigation of the attack, and while its findings were hardly flattering for the State Department, the probe helped prove that "Republican charges of a cover-up" were "pure fiction."
Inhofe has no evidence to the contrary. He has no questions that have not yet been answered. But he doesn't seem to care.
As a rule, Americans benefit if the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee is at least a little responsible when it comes to making baseless accusations about terrorist attacks. Perhaps Inhofe isn't the best person for this job?
Leave a Comment:
This is baseless grandstanding from people who have nothing to talk about, and that's the problem...Someone the other day mentioned that this administration was as far as the Republicans were concerned "Annoyingly scandal free". They don't have anything that they can actually complain about at all but that isn't going to stop them from getting their sound bites on FOX. It keeps their base angry and supportive and makes them look relevant and Inhofe hasn't been relevant in years.
You might want to step away from this one. There is no set of circumstances in this mess that doesn't involve bald-face lying to the American people about a dead Ambassador.
Worse the film maker who is blameless, still sits in jail. This is Soviet style govt.
*sigh* Someone's been listening to Rush. The film maker was jailed for violating a court order to stay off the internet.
shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am
I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.
For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.
Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.
______________________________________
New day. Same old ca-ca from the trolling class.
1.1 Prove it.
Mr Benen, if nothing else you are a loyal and ardent member of the administration. Obama could have no better spokesperson on the net.
Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi....more guns. The statement above proves the statement below. I rest my case.
shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am
I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.
For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.
Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.
______________________________________
New day. Same old ca-ca from the trolling class.
so burro, which part of that are you having difficulty with? The pushback or being nice?
Just trolling the troll.
shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am
I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.
For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.
Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.
______________________________________
New day. Same old ca-ca from the trolling class.
The part where you're admitting that you're just a troll and try to come up with things to say that you know will inflame the left rather than engaging in a level headed debate.
You mean all the things that Obama would rather keep covered up.
At the moment, I'm waiting for a lawyer to show up, what would you like to have a level headed debate about?
shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am
I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.
For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.
Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.
______________________________________
New day. Same old ca-ca from the trolling class.
Omg Shooter, you're so right. Ever notice how Obama is always seen wearing shoes? Why is he trying to cover up his toes? What's with those toes that we need to know? What are his toes hiding?
Do I believe Petraeus or Obama and Rice.... Hmmmm.
http://www.examiner.com/article/petraeus-indicates-obama-rice-lied
shooter242
June 11, 2012 at 6:54 am
I’d like to encourage more trollery on left wing sites. Specifically pushback on common memes such as identified by Jonah Goldberg as unchallenged cliches. It can actually work, and it can actually change the course of debate.
For instance, I always challenge “the rich take too much of the pie” meme. There is no pie, no one decides who gets what, and the “pie” is a measure of contributions to a total. Ergo the rich don’t take they contribute. It’s been gratifyingly effective.
Try it you’ll like it. Don’t curse and keep the personal insults to a bare minimum, don’t allow moving goal posts or distractions. Ignore trollish responders, and be four times more civil. They hate that.
______________________________________
New day. Same old ca-ca from the trolling class.
Keep grasping at those straws Shooter.
The owner of examiner.com said he wants it to be the 'Fox News of the Internet.' It's 'written' largely by freeper types, teabaggers, and gun nuts.
What else 'ya got, blanks?
They still hope to get to Obama any way possible. If they can't find actual evidence of impeachable offenses they at least want to dim the public view of Obama by repeatedly intimating that there was a cover-up. This is how the Right works - repeat the lie until the lie is believed. Facts don't matter to them because their base doesn't believe facts, anyway. The base believe the facts are fabricated for the purpose of a cover-up. You can't argue with stupid.
In Other News, the White House Soup of the Day is Snapper. And there appears that there is NO snapping turtle in it!
Suboenas, Mr. Issa, ASAP!
February 08, 2013 06:00 AM
Republican Strategist: GOP Full of "Cranks, Haters and Bigots"
9/11 should be seared into the memories of all Americans. It became quite obvious after 9/11 that the administration's prior neglect of security warnings bordered upon a criminal level. While it is not totally obvious or proven that the administration had prior knowledge of the impending attack, it is also not obvious or proven that the administration did not have some level of knowledge and chose to cover it up.
For Pooper242, I would like to point out that I am describing 9/11/2001. If Obama has some level of complicity in the deaths of 4 Americans, where does Little George stand in your view in his complicity in the deaths of about 3000 Americans?
And I would like to remind old pooper242 that this was not the only embassy attack ever:
Here you go ...here's some other Embassy related stuff to get your pantyhose in a knot about
Seven U.S. Embassies And Consulates Were Attacked Under George W. Bush
2002: U.S. Consulate In Karachi, Pakistan, Attacked; 10 Killed, 51 Injured.
2004: U.S. Embassy Bombed In Uzbekistan.
2004: Gunmen Stormed U.S. Consulate In Saudi Arabia.
2006: Armed Men Attacked U.S. Embassy In Syria.
2007: Grenade Launched Into U.S. Embassy In Athens. From The New York Times:
2008: Rioters Set Fire To U.S. Embassy In Serbia.
2008: Ten People Killed In Bombings At U.S. Embassy In Yemen.
CARTER
1979: Iranians Seized Hostages After Storming U.S. Embassy In Tehran.
1979: Pakistanis Attacked And Burned U.S. Embassy In Islamabad.
1979: U.S. Embassy In Tripoli Was Attacked And Burned.
REAGAN
1983: Bomb Blast At U.S. Embassy In Beirut Killed More Than 60, Including 17 Americans.
1983, bombing of the U.S. Embassy in Lebanon:
1983: Car Bomb Damaged U.S. Embassy In Kuwait.
1987: Car Bomb Exploded Outside U.S. Embassy In Italy.
GEORGE H.W. BUSH
1990: Palestinian Guerrillas Attempted To Attack U.S. Embassy In Tel Aviv. From a June 21, 1990, New York Times article:
CLINTON
1998: Terrorist Bombs Near U.S. Embassies In Kenya, Tanzania Injured More Than 1,000 And Killed More Than 60, Including Eight Americans. From an August 7, 1998, Associated Press article:
http://mediamatters.org/research/2012/09/14/krauthammer-whitewashes-bushs-history-to-bash-o/189890
I know that it is great fun poking at Republican absurdity on Bengazi, but seriously Steve that boat has sailed. Don't encourage the children. There are other more important things to talk about.
For example across the country, Republican politicians are finding themselves between the hard place that is their base and the reality that is governing over medicaid expansion. In my own home state of Missouri the St. Louis PBS station produced a wonderful examination of just who is going to be adversely impacted by a Republican decision not to sign up for expanded medicare. It turns out the very right wing rural constitutents of the right wing Republicans controlling the legislature will be among the most seriously impacted. Rural hospitals will close and a lot of tea party base types going to emergency rooms and free clinics will be without medical care. Tea Party regulars are going to die. Republican ideology must be worshiped above all else. If it wasn't for the death and suffering Republican ideologues are inflicting on their own people at the state level this would be a moment of pure karma.
Please get off stories about Faux News personalities and back to real news.
Well said, Mr. Byers!
Of course, the health of the GOP depends upon distracting the base with bright and shiny objects- aka the "kenyan usurper who is bent on stealing our precious bodily fluids!"
Worse yet, when it happens they'll blame it on Obamacare--
Proof, facts, science, logic, rational analysis - these are an anathema to GOTP land, just look at Blankman's baseless ramblings. Whatever the "real truth" is the GOTP don't want to acknowledge it! It's always Obama's fault - this thinking has so permeated and invaded their little brains that they see nothing else! Blame it on the black man - that's the only objective!
And that's why they need to be voted out of office!
In some strange way I am OK with this type of stupidity. The way I see it, the more crazy they get, the More the people of the World will see WHY the USA is losing its standing in the world. We are starting to get Pity Points.
I think people the world over a getting a better picture of why our system is broke and why we have been broken for so many years. With such HUGE problems facing our Nation, the last thing we should be doing is beating a dead horse. ( the dead horse is Not Susan Rice but the claim of cover-up)
The part of me that is not OK with it, Knows we can never get better as a Nation, as long as this type of thinking pervades the other half of congress.
Your work at keeping this face of Republican and Democrats alike before our nation and the world, Might just be taking hold. One can Pray it is at least, Right ?
Not only are we getting the pity from some of our friends...but we seem to be scaring the beejesus out of them, as well...
This sort of thing works only when other information (i.e. the truth) isn't allowed out.
That Inhoffe act as if that situation applies here tells you all you need to know about his views on democracy, the Constitution and the voters.
The voters in the deep south have made it clear that Inhofe is the kind of person they want to represent them. The truth is the tonic. I say keep on posting these articles Steve, eventually enough young people without preconceived notions about blacks and gays will start to push back, even in Oklahoma...
As an OK voter, please remember we did not all vote GOP in this state. It was a very brave act to have an Obama/Biden yard sign, to encourage other enlightened voters. We would appreciate any ideas you have to help this red state, that has been bought and paid for by Corp money. (As are our congressmen by big oil - esp. Halliburton) It takes less money to buy a smaller state. eg. Oklahoma & Arkansas.
If I hear one more Republican talk about all the "unanswered questions" and how the American people still have "questions" without actually asking a question or filling us in on what those questions are, I'm going to lose my mind!
I'd like to casually invite Senator Inhofe to eat a bag of salted dicks. Where the hell was this little pinhead when 3000 Americans were slaughtered due to G.W. Bush's malfeasance? Where was the outrage over 9/11?? Please...the ideological bases of these critiques is positively disgusting. How about some facts?? Oh, that's right, they don't have any.
Wonder what the out come would have been, if consulate’s budget had the proper funding for security.
One of the reasons we pay taxes is to keep our people safe.
I lay this one at the feet of the Republicans with their - We can’t tax the people who horde the money so lets cut spending and leave our people vulnerable to attacks.
The problem is not so much with Susan Rice herself, except in that she allowed herself to be used as a pawn by the Administration. Pres. Obama clearly stated that Ambassador Rice "had nothing to do with Benghazi" and was simply repeating on multiple Sunday shows the talking points the Administration had provided to her. Why send out someone unassociated with Benghazi to deliver talking points? Even the most ardent Obama backers can figure that one out: To control the message, ie. to protect the messenger from having to answer any possible probing questions.
Let's bring together a few bits of information...
In discussing the intelligence on Benghazi, Secretary Clinton now characterizes those early days after the attack as a time when information was "fluid" and unstable. It's not unusual for early information on an incident to be incorrect and in need of review and correction, she says. Yet in view of this, she and the Obama Administration latched onto the YouTube video narrative and RAN HARD WITH IT.
Susan Rice's prepared talking points got down to specifics: She explained the incident was a "copycat" protest of what was happening in Cairo -- a protest that was a response to "a very offensive video." In Benghazi, it began as a small number of people gathered around the consulate to replicate the Cairo protest. From there, "clusters of extremists with heavier weapons highjacked the protest" and the incident escalated. Where did this specific detailed information come from?
Two days after Susan Rice made the talk show circuit, Director of National Counterterrorism Matt Olsen didn't back up the "video protest gone sour" story. What did he know that the Administration didn't? And yet for days afterwards, Jay Carney, Hillary Clinton, and President Obama placed their focus on the hateful anti-Muslim video and on the need for more religious tolerance.
Libyan President Magarief was plainspoken that the attack had been a "pre-planned act of terrorism" which had "nothing to do with" the video. Yet as evidence mounted IN CONTRADICTION to the YouTube story, Secretary Clinton brushed aside such evidence, emphasizing that it would be best to await the results of ongoing investigations and how it was unwise to jump to conclusions without all the facts. (Why didn't she use this same standard when it came to the YouTube story?)
On the subject of the video, the Accountability Review Board report simply stated that it had "concluded there was no protest prior to the attacks." What we're all waiting for is to know what intelligence was relied on, what evidence was so compelling, that the Administration would run hard with the YouTube story -- even to the point of feeling a need to downplay other explanations of how the incident began.