Comments on: Benghazi and the Republican abandonment of the center Wed, 26 Nov 2014 19:47:54 +0000 hourly 1 By: Globalman Fri, 17 May 2013 11:48:25 +0000 Excellent leadership from the top breeds cooperation to get things accomplished. Obama early in his tenure set the tone. He bred divisiveness and sowed discontent. Now the country is paying the price. Look at previos presidents in history, both democrats and republicans.. They did not create such division and had relatively successful terms. Strong and constructive leaderships in government or the private sector unite not divide. This is the lesson of Obama’s presidency.

By: vxx Tue, 14 May 2013 17:31:51 +0000 This blog does an injustice. First the “background check Bill” had many errors and it did more than background checks for buyers. It required background and fees multiple times. With federal felonies for normal usages. That is why it was defeated. Non gun owners do not know about FFL fees. FFL dealer who are just someone who is licensed and collects these often high fees.
Nicholas do a better job of telling the public why. It is so important that the details are discussed. The Obama administration has not informed the public on specifics. So they do not understand.

On Benghazi The teabagger core of the GOP is not the conservative party of Reagan but a new beast interested in money. They think that the poor are just leeches and the seniors who do not have a good pension plan should be thrown under the bus. All in the name of no taxes.
Benghazi gives this rabid core a anger point as most have no understanding of international diplomacy or intelligence operations.
Yes you are right that they are giving the presidential election to the democrats. But IMO is not their goal. It is controlling congress. Obama has given the rabid core a two reasons. 1. the Benghazi incident and 2. the gun control issue. These strike non urban populations hard.

By: Blackshirt Tue, 14 May 2013 12:37:14 +0000 There are some really questionable statements in this piece. A little more diligence with the fact-checking would have been nice. I know this is an editorial, but truth is always the most convincing argument…

By: lfreel1more Mon, 13 May 2013 19:04:10 +0000 What’s missing on both sides is that 4 Americans died. So when liberals say this is all right-wing politics, they trample on the graves of those four fellow citizens. And when conservatives say this for sure worse than Watergate (no one died there) without all the facts yet, they are racing past those same graves. Those four families deserve answers. Neither side even thinks of them. They’re just collateral damage.

The best thing that could happen is Obama get impeached, Hillary disqualified from running in 2016, and the public so mad at how the GOP got to the truth that we actually elect an independent candidate in 2016 and leave both parties dangling in their own messes.

By: COindependent Mon, 13 May 2013 13:43:47 +0000 My understanding of the issue was that the White House and State Department, due to being the middle of a political campaign, effectively doctored the talking points to minimize the impact on an election.

Granted the President was overtly naive when he said his administration would be the most transparent relative to past administrations, and has proven otherwise. The fact is that the political pressure he is enduring is because of that commitment to the American public.

When a novice speaks, he should not be offended when he compromises his promise. Nor, should the Sec’y of State as she is ultimately responsible for not increasing the level of security and protection for the diplomatic team under her command. Especially when one considers the diplomatic teams from other Western governments were pulled from Benghazi as the security situation deteriorated. Be it ignorance, or a simple failure to act, does not diminish her accountability.

By: JL4 Mon, 13 May 2013 13:33:08 +0000 When a diplomat agrees to go to the Middle East, they understand the risks they take. I don’t doubt that every effort is made to ensure the safety of those Americans. Sadly, that can’t always be done.

This is an obvious witch hunt – a desperate and transparent attempt to smear Obama with anything Republicans can get their hands on. It is proof-positive that Republicans have lost their minds and can’t move past their frenzied and irrational hatred for all things Obama.

I’m with Leftcoastrocky, it’s time for the GOP to move on and focus on US economic legislation, but fat chance for that. History will not reflect well on the Republicans for their 8 year hysteria.

By: Leftcoastrocky Mon, 13 May 2013 02:55:57 +0000 The Teapublican hearings are costing the country money. I propose that Fox News pay for them.

By: Leftcoastrocky Mon, 13 May 2013 02:54:50 +0000 Republicans accuse the Obama administration of politicizing the Benghazi talking points. However, the far worse politicization has been the continuing hearings by the Republicans.

Time to move on GOP and pass jobs legislation.

By: OneOfTheSheep Mon, 13 May 2013 00:36:24 +0000 flashrooster,

What I find “perplexing” is that you, and many like you, think people like Saddam Hussein can be ignored. They can’t. They have to be “taken out”, sooner or later.

Since Bush, America has attempted negotiations in good faith with North Korea and Iran to no avail. It is they who ignore us even as each pursues their own agenda which, if you don’t know, is nuclear blackmail as soon as they have capability.

The 4,500 American soldiers who were killed are each as precious as those killed in WW II. My father was one of those. But freedom has a continuing price and those 4,500 were a “bargain”, as offensive as that term must sound, when compared to the likely American death toll had Saddam continued in power to today and the “taking out” process not yet commenced. Military tacticians know it is usually less costly in terms of lives to attack ASAP, thus denying an enemy time to further prepare available defenses.

Perhaps the principal difference between your perspective and mine is that you deem Iraq an “unnecessary” war, while I deem it absolutely unavoidable in the long run. Here we just have to “agree to disagree”.

I, too, am angry at the “mistakes made” in dismissing the Iraqi military, in the corruption, waste and sheer incompetency of American reconstruction and ineffective reconciliation efforts, etc. But once that money and “good will” were spent, that “bell” cannot be “unrung”. I stifle my anger because if I don’t it so clouds my thinking as to give any and all opponents undue advantage.

Would I like to see Haliburton and the other contractors and subcontractors investigated and the guilty incarcerated? YES! Will this ever happen? No. Why? Take your pick of excuses…my guess is the reality of such influence as to effectively deflect meaningful inquiry. So yeah. America is supposed to be more competent that has been seen of late.

To be candid, unless America were to have made Iraq and/or Afghanistan protectorates (like Puerto Rico) we could never have applied the value of their oil reserves to our financial “cost” of liberting them. As someone said, you break it, you “own it”…the bad situation, not their natural resources. Did America learn anything? Yeah. ANOTHER way to LOSE in Afghanistan.

It was unavoidable that “Afghani leadership” (oxymoron) “take the point”. Hamad Karsai has proven to be as effective and popular as our South Vietnamese “allies” of the seventies.

We deliver him bags of cash daily and he regularly deals directly with the Taliban, repeatedly accuses our people of “atrocities”. His shames and corruption rub off on us with no end in sight. Our sole alternative has supposedly been to hand the “keys to the country” BACK to the Taliban and watch jihadi groups return to recruit, train and mount attacks worldwide from that cesspool and it’s neighbor Pakistan.

Personally, I think we could have done much better dealing with the Afghani warlords of the Northern Alliance. We certainly could not have done worse!

Benghazi is absolute “proof positive” that the U.S. is NOT learning lessons from it’s recent experience(s) necessary to protect it’s interests, either at home OR abroad. WHY? There is a conspicuous absence of effective “leadership”…no worthwhile goal(s). No goals, no plan. No plan, no priorities. We are not acting, but reacting; and I see no prospect of change whatsoever! THAT’s what “bothers me!”

By: RexMax46 Sun, 12 May 2013 18:22:57 +0000 @OneOfTheSheeps asks, “Were we, the people, lied to?”

No, we weren’t.

While the Benghazi attack was not immediately labeled as a “terrorist attack”, waiting until facts are confirmed before inflammatory conclusions are made is a sign of prudence, not deceit. Recently history should be a VIVID reminder of the dangers of rushing to inflammatory, but ultimately false conclusions. Furthermore, as we do not live in a perfect world, terrorist attacks are sometimes successful despite our best efforts. I would not blame the Benghazi attack on Hillary Clinton any more than I would blame 9/11 on Bush Jr. To do either is to let politic blind you to the true dangers in our world.
So when you, like the GOP, repeatedly ask “Were we, the people, lied to?” and the answer is “No” every time, it becomes clear their question is based in rhetoric rather than reason. The type of questioning that makes one a “Truther” with a delusional conspiracy theory rather than a person actually interested in the truth. The type of questioning that, while appropriate for an Inquisition, is very unbecoming of a US political party.