Sure, it might be one of those things where the Republicans are essentially pointing fingers at the Obama Administration as if it was a case of Worst. President. Ever.* even though, as the above graphic and this post by Bob Cesca remind us, there certainly had been terrorist attacks on US citizens abroad under the previous administration without this level of concern--and all in order to...fund-raise? Or take shots at the reputation of the biggest perceived 2016 presidential threat the Dems have?
Well, that sure is what it looks like to me on both counts, but my outrage-o-meter over that sort of shenanigans was pretty well played-out during the Clinton Administration. Surely they can aim lower than that. And I don't doubt they will.**
* With respects to anyone having the title of W.P.E., though, the more I think it over, the more the Reagan Administration strikes me as truly corrupt, in ways that I was too young to totally comprehend back when it was "current events" and which only comes into focus after time has elapsed. They sold weapons to Iran to fund an illegal war. And Oliver North works for Fox News. And somehow, Fox News with a straight face would allege terrorists killing four people in Libya is a bigger scandal than Watergate.
I could take wingnut lessons, but I don't think I will ever gain fluency.
** Although on this matter, I think Sen. Inhofe sets the bar for tone:
“I think that she has gotten by with that type of a forceful attitude, something that’s not normally accustomed — that you don’t hear from women as much as you do men. And she came out so forcefully, and you could tell that it was orchestrated at the time that she said it,” Inhofe said in an interview Thursday on “The Rusty Humphries Show.”A low tone, right? Asso profundo, I believe.
4 comments:
I think the prospect of a Hilary run in '16 has the Republicans crapping their pants. This Banghazi thing, though, seems to be backfiring- they keep reminding us of old Republican scandals by saying Benghazi was worse (worse than Iran-Contra? WTF?). Now, some of them are saying it was worse than the original 9/11 attacks, which even the most nutty of wingnuts has to be unconvinced by.
I think they are going to get burned badly by this continuing travesty... continue to make love to that domestic galliform avian, Republicans.
Good synops. This is jsut so much of nothing, not to belittle the tragedy.
my take?
I ate at Benghazi’s once. The couscous with goose was good, and so was the marinated dates. The flat bread was excellent! The salad left much to be desired though.
RE: the shit in Washington? It is tilting at windmills, chasing the elusive e-mail….. that doesn’t exist. Sancho Panza and I will stick with the couscous.
“But all this must be suffered by those who profess the stern order of chivalry”~ Cervantes
It's not whether Obama is the WPE. That's a Republican, as you say.
But is he the WDPSICV?
(the Worst Democratic President Since I Could Vote)
That's got to be Clinton or Obama. Neither of those two is fit to shine Jimmy Carter's shoes, for all the shit that Jimmmy's gotten over the decades.
As for Benghazi, my thoughts are here.
~
Well, ifthethunderdontgetya, I have to agree--but then, there's only been Clinton and Obama since *I* could vote. And I'll be realy honest--better than a republican isn't a very high bar.
okjimm: the joy of a manufactured scandal is that it's a moveable feast; the Washington wankers can just open up a banquet of bs on any day they like.
BBBB: I wonder how many times journos can fall for that particular trick in any game of fetch, where a human makes as if to throw a ball to the patient pooch, and then palms it behind her/his back. At least a few will have to catch on--there is no ball. And may even feel a bit sore.
Post a Comment